Apartheid Case to Proceed Because Supreme Court Can't Muster a Quorum
The recusals of four justices left the U.S. Supreme Court without a quorum today in a dispute over the legal rights of apartheid victims, leaving intact an appeals court ruling allowing their suit to go forward.
The suit seeks damages from U.S. companies accused of assisting South Africa’s apartheid government, the Associated Press reports. The defendant companies assert that U.S. courts should not hear the case because of objections by the U.S. and South African governments, SCOTUSblog reports.
Three justices did not participate in the decision whether to hear the case apparently because of stock holdings in some of the companies sued. A fourth recused apparently because of family ties. That left only five justices to hear the case; a quorum of six justices is required.
The lack of a quorum has the effect of affirming a ruling by the New York City-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that allowed the suit for aiding and abetting violations of the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Geneva Conventions. However the opinion allows the defendants to argue before a federal judge that the case should be dismissed on grounds of deference to Executive Branch opposition, according to SCOTUSblog.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Stephen G. Breyer apparently recused because of their stock holdings, according to both reports. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy apparently recused because his son is employed by one of the companies, Credit Suisse.
The case is American Isuzu Motors v. Ntsebeza.
