Mohamad v. Palestinian Authority (2011)
- Docket
- 11-88
- Decided
- 2011-01-01
Summary
Question: Does the Torture Victim Protection Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, permit actions against defendants who are not natural persons? Conclusion: No. Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court affirming the decision of the United States Court of Appeals. The Court held that the word "individual" in the Torture Victim Protection Act means a natural person and does not impose any liability against organizations. The Court ruled that a word in a statute will be given its everyday meaning unless Congress gives some indication that it intends the word to have a broader meaning. The Court further determined that legislative history supported its interpretation. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote no opinion but did not join the Court regarding its analysis of the legislative history. Justice Stephen G. Breyer filed a concurring opinion. He noted that the word "individual" is open to multiple interpretations and can mean natural persons, corporations, or other entities, making the word alone is insufficient to decide the case. Only the legislative history could make up for the interpretive inadequacies of considering language alone.