Supreme Court Shuts Down Lawsuit Against Cisco Over China's Persecution of Falun Gong

.

A Case Over 15 Years in the Making

On June 23, 2026, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling that effectively ends a lawsuit filed in 2011 by practitioners of Falun Gong – a spiritual discipline rooted in meditation and moral teachings – against Cisco Systems, one of the world's largest networking technology companies.

The plaintiffs, represented by the Human Rights Law Foundation, accused Cisco of knowingly helping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) build and operate its so-called "Golden Shield" – a large-scale internet surveillance infrastructure used to monitor, track, and ultimately persecute Falun Gong practitioners across China.

The lawsuit alleged that Cisco's technology enabled Chinese security forces to identify members of the group, leading to arbitrary detention, torture, forced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings.

The Legal Weapon at the Center of the Case

The lawsuit was brought under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), a U.S. law dating back to 1789. Originally designed to allow foreign nationals to sue in American courts for violations of international law, the ATS was largely dormant for nearly 200 years before human rights attorneys began using it in the 1980s.

The central legal question in this case: Can a corporation be held liable under the ATS for helping – that is, "aiding and abetting" – human rights violations carried out by a foreign government?

The Supreme Court answered: No.

The Court's Decision

Writing for the six-justice conservative majority, Justice Amy Coney Barrett stated clearly that American courts cannot create new legal rights of action to address violations of international law. Therefore, she concluded, there is no basis for holding corporations liable as accomplices under the ATS.

"Courts cannot create new rights of action to remedy violations of international law, so there is necessarily no liability for aiding and abetting such violations," Barrett wrote. All claims against Cisco were ordered dismissed.

The court's three liberal justices – Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson – dissented from this portion of the ruling.

In a related but separate 8-1 decision, the court also rejected claims under the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991, which sought to hold two individual Cisco executives personally liable for aiding and abetting torture. Only Justice Sotomayor dissented from that second ruling.

The "Golden Shield" Allegations

At the heart of the lawsuit lies one of the most controversial chapters in the history of Silicon Valley's relationship with authoritarian regimes.

The plaintiffs alleged that Cisco did not merely sell off-the-shelf technology to China. Rather, they argued, the company actively developed and tailored its systems to meet the specific surveillance and persecution needs of the CCP's crackdown on Falun Gong – a campaign that human rights organizations have documented as involving systematic abuse on a massive scale.

Cisco has consistently denied these allegations, calling them unfounded and offensive.

Trump Administration Sided with Cisco

The case drew notable attention when the Trump administration filed a brief siding with Cisco, urging the Supreme Court to limit corporate liability under the ATS. This aligned with a broader policy approach favoring business interests and limiting extraterritorial application of U.S. law.

A Decade of Courts Narrowing the ATS

Tuesday's ruling did not happen in a vacuum. It is the latest in a series of Supreme Court decisions since 2013 that have progressively narrowed the scope of the Alien Tort Statute:

• 2013 (Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum): The court ruled that the ATS generally cannot be used to sue over conduct that occurred entirely outside the United States.
• 2018 (Jesner v. Arab Bank): Foreign corporations were excluded from ATS liability altogether.
• 2021 (Nestlé USA v. Doe): The court dismissed a slavery-related case against Nestlé and Cargill, ruling the plaintiffs hadn't shown sufficient U.S.-based conduct.

The Cisco ruling now closes what had been one of the last remaining openings: the possibility that domestic U.S. corporations could still be held liable as accomplices in overseas abuses.

Background: Falun Gong and the CCP's Crackdown

Falun Gong – also known as Falun Dafa – is a spiritual practice combining meditative exercises with teachings centered on the principles of truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance. Founded in China in 1992, it grew rapidly in popularity throughout the 1990s.

In 1999, after an estimated 10,000 practitioners gathered peacefully near the central leadership compound in Beijing, the CCP under Jiang Zemin launched a full-scale campaign to eradicate the movement. Since then, credible international human rights organizations including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have documented widespread persecution, including mass arbitrary detentions, torture in custody, and in some documented cases, forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience.

The case against Cisco was one of the few legal attempts in any Western jurisdiction to hold a private corporation accountable for enabling that campaign through its technology.

What Comes Next

With this ruling, the path to corporate accountability for tech companies that provide surveillance tools to authoritarian regimes has become dramatically narrower in U.S. courts.

Legal experts note that while domestic U.S. law may offer little further recourse for the plaintiffs, the ruling does not prevent legislative action. Congress could, in theory, amend or strengthen statutes to restore broader corporate liability for human rights complicity.

For the Falun Gong community, this decision represents a painful legal setback – though one that comes after more than 15 years of persistent legal effort, and a moment when their suffering was placed, however briefly, before the highest court in the United States.

.

Sources

1. Reuters – "US Supreme Court ends suit alleging Cisco helped China pursue Falun Gong" (June 23, 2026): https://www.reuters.com/world/us-supreme-court-ends-suit-alleging-cisco-helped-china-pursue-falun-gong-2026-06-23/
2. Human Rights Watch – Documentation on Falun Gong persecution in China: https://www.hrw.org/topic/china/falun-gong
3. Amnesty International – Falun Gong prisoners of conscience reports: https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/asia-and-the-pacific/east-asia/china/
4. Cornell Law School – Legal Information Institute, overview of the Alien Tort Statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/alien_tort_statute
5. SCOTUSblog – Case tracking, Cisco Systems Inc. v. Doe (for legal background): https://www.scotusblog.com

.