The U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal from Cisco Systems regarding a lawsuit filed by Falun Gong members. The lawsuit alleges that Cisco provided surveillance technology to the Chinese government, which was used to track and persecute believers. Cisco argues it is not liable under the Alien Tort Statute or the Torture Victim Protection Act for actions taken by a foreign government. The Trump administration has supported Cisco’s request for a hearing, citing skepticism over using U.S. courts for foreign acts. Arguments are scheduled for the spring, with a final decision expected by early summer. This ruling will determine the extent of legal responsibility for American tech companies selling surveillance tools to foreign states.
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear a major case that could change how American technology companies do business in other countries. The case involves a bid by the tech giant Cisco to shut down a long-running lawsuit. This lawsuit was filed by members of the Falun Gong spiritual movement. These members claim that Cisco’s technology was used by the Chinese government to persecute them. The justices agreed on Friday to take up the appeal. They will review an earlier ruling that would have allowed the case to move forward in U.S. courts.
The official rationale for the Supreme Court taking this case involves a long-standing skepticism. Both the court and past presidential administrations have doubted the use of U.S. courts for acts involving foreign governments. This is especially true when those acts happen in other countries. The Trump administration specifically asked the justices to hear Cisco’s appeal. They believe that U.S. courts should not always be the place where people seek justice for things that happen abroad. This stance focuses on the limits of the American legal system and the importance of the rule of law.
The lawsuit against Cisco was first started in two thousand eleven. The people who sued the company are believers in the Falun Gong movement. They allege that Cisco made special technology for the government in Beijing. They say the company knew this technology would be used to track, detain, and torture them. The lawsuit claims that Cisco’s actions helped the Chinese state carry out these human rights violations. This case is a major part of the discussion about how technology can be used for surveillance.
Internal documents from Cisco have played a big role in this legal battle. In two thousand eight, some papers were leaked to the press. These papers showed that Cisco saw the Golden Shield as a good way to make sales. The Golden Shield is the name for the internet censorship system used in China. The company reportedly quoted a Chinese official who called the Falun Gong an evil cult. This shows how the company viewed the situation while it was trying to sell its products to the Chinese government.
Other presentations from the company were also reviewed by the Associated Press. One presentation from the same year said that Cisco’s products could identify more than ninety percent of Falun Gong material on the internet. The reports also showed that Cisco described this material as a threat. The company helped build a national information system. This system was used to keep track of people who followed the Falun Gong movement. These details are central to the claims made by the people who filed the lawsuit.
Cisco argues that it is not legally responsible under the laws mentioned in the lawsuit. There are two main laws at the center of this case. One is the Alien Tort Statute. This is a very old law that was first written in the eighteenth century. The other law is the Torture Victim Protection Act. This act was passed by Congress in nineteen ninety-one. Cisco believes that these laws do not allow people to sue American companies for the actions of foreign governments. The company wants the Supreme Court to end the lawsuit now.
An investigation by the Associated Press last year provided more context for this case. The investigation showed that many American tech companies helped build the surveillance state in China. This work was often encouraged by both Republican and Democratic administrations. Activists warned for years that these tools would be used to stop people from speaking out against the government. They also warned that the tools would be used to target religious groups and minorities. This history shows that Cisco was not the only company involved in these types of sales.
The members of the Falun Gong movement are trying to overcome the court’s skepticism. They argue that a large part of Cisco’s work for China actually took place inside the United States. They believe this gives U.S. courts the right to hear the case. They want to hold the company accountable for the role its technology played in their mistreatment. The Supreme Court will have to decide if these arguments are strong enough to let the lawsuit continue. The decision will have a big impact on the tech industry.
The practical policy impact of this case will be clear by early summer. Arguments will take place in the spring. The ruling will decide if American companies face legal responsibility under the Alien Tort Statute or the Torture Victim Protection Act for activities abroad. This decision will affect any U.S. company that sells surveillance or data tools to foreign states. The ingestion does not list specific filing fees or paperwork requirements for the companies involved in this specific appeal. It also does not mention specific enforcement steps beyond the court’s final ruling.
The Supreme Court building is a well-known site on Capitol Hill in Washington. A photo from November seventh, two thousand twenty-five, shows the court as it prepares for its upcoming work. Mark Sherman is a reporter who has covered the Supreme Court for the Associated Press since two thousand six. He has spent decades reporting on the legal system. He is based in Washington and has lived in many other major cities. His reporting helps the public understand how these complex legal cases work.
The public is now waiting for the justices to hear the arguments in the spring. This case is an important part of the series called The Algorithmic State. It looks at how technology and the law work together. The final decision from the court will provide more oversight on how American companies operate in the global market. It will also clarify the rules for human rights lawsuits in the digital age. The court will release its final decision after the spring arguments are finished.
Lisa Grant serves as a Staff Writer for Just Right News, where she spearheads the publication’s coverage of Technology, Data Capitalism, and Surveillance. With a focus on the encroaching influence of Big Tech on the American way of life, Grant brings a critical, liberty-minded perspective to the most complex digital issues of the modern era. Her reporting is defined by a deep-seated skepticism of centralized power and a commitment to protecting the privacy and autonomy of the individual against the rising tide of what she calls the “Algorithmic State.”
Grant’s unique insight into the tech industry is rooted in her upbringing in Palo Alto, California. Growing up in the epicenter of Silicon Valley, she witnessed firsthand the transformation of the technology sector from a hub of scrappy, freedom-loving innovators into a landscape dominated by monolithic corporations. This proximity to the birth of the digital revolution provided her with an insider’s understanding of the culture and motivations driving the industry. For Grant, the shift toward data capitalism—where personal information is harvested as a primary commodity—is not just a market evolution, but a fundamental challenge to traditional American values of property rights and personal privacy. She saw the “garage startup” ethos replaced by a culture of data-mining and social engineering, a transition that informs her vigilant reporting today.
Now based in Seattle, Washington, Grant operates from another of the nation’s primary technological frontiers. Her location in the Pacific Northwest allows her to observe the real-world consequences of the tech industry’s expansion, from the implementation of invasive surveillance technologies in urban centers to the growing partnership between corporate entities and municipal governance. By reporting from the ground in Seattle, she bridges the gap between the abstract world of coding and the tangible impact it has on citizens’ daily lives, often highlighting how local policies serve as a testing ground for broader national surveillance initiatives.
At the heart of her work for Just Right News is her acclaimed feature series, “The Algorithmic State.” Through this series, Grant explores the ways in which automated systems and artificial intelligence are increasingly used to bypass traditional legislative processes and social norms. She argues that the reliance on opaque algorithms to manage society threatens to erode the transparency and accountability essential to a free republic. Her work meticulously documents how data-driven governance can lead to a “soft” surveillance state that penalizes traditional viewpoints and rewards digital conformity.
Grant’s reporting is a vital resource for readers who are wary of the “nanny state” and the unchecked power of digital gatekeepers. She views the defense of the digital frontier as the next great battle for constitutional conservatives. By exposing the mechanisms of data capitalism and the quiet expansion of surveillance networks, she empowers her audience to reclaim their digital sovereignty. In an era where information is often weaponized by those in power, Lisa Grant remains a steadfast advocate for the truth, ensuring that the principles of liberty and individual agency are not lost in the transition to an increasingly digital world.