Bill Overview
Title: Alien Tort Statute Clarification Act
Description: This bill establishes that U.S. district courts have extraterritorial jurisdiction over certain torts if (1) an alleged defendant is a national of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence; or (2) an alleged defendant is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the alleged defendant.
Sponsors: Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in international human rights-related torts
Estimated Size: 4000000
- The bill affects individuals who can be subject to lawsuits in U.S. courts under the Alien Tort Statute, particularly focusing on those who can be considered as defendants.
- It applies to U.S. nationals, lawful permanent residents, and any individuals present in the U.S., potentially expanding the number of people who can be held accountable under this statute.
- The global population impacted would include any national or organization involved in activities connecting them to torts that could be tried in the U.S., especially in cases involving human rights abuses.
Reasoning
- The population that would be directly concerned involves U.S. nationals and lawfully admitted permanent residents who might be involved in international torts, including corporate executives, legal analysts, foreign relations advisors, and expatriates. Considering that this law could potentially expand the reach of lawsuits and legal processes involving alleged international torts, people who might have dealings globally could be concerned about increased litigation risks. The policy budget limits would need to prioritize expenses such as legal aid for those involved, potentially impacting their willingness to engage internationally.
- This policy would potentially impact people who have international dealings or are involved in businesses with potential exposure to human rights abuses. As such, individuals in legal, business, or international relations professions are more directly impacted, but also those in higher executive roles who could be made accountable under the new jurisdiction rules. Given the nature of international tort law, a portion of the population might not see changes in their day-to-day life, thus not experiencing any immediate change in wellbeing.
Simulated Interviews
Corporate Executive (New York, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about the increased risk of litigation.
- This might change how we do business internationally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 8 |
Human Rights Lawyer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could help hold perpetrators accountable.
- It might create a better environment for justice.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Oil Company Manager (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could increase our legal costs significantly.
- We might need a strategy to mitigate potential risks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
International Relations Advisor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns well with international human rights efforts.
- It gives more power to address issues globally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Expatriate Business Consultant (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This might complicate the business expansion process.
- We may need to reassess potential international partners.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 8 |
Tech Company CEO (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If applied fairly, this policy could prevent abuses.
- However, it might increase our legal compliance workload.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Legal Analyst (Boston, MA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I foresee more analytical work to be done regarding risks.
- This policy will influence our legal advisories.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Human Rights Advocate (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a step towards accountability for global crimes.
- This should enhance protections for victims.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Diplomat (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It seems like a necessary update to protect human rights.
- There's some concern about implementation effectiveness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
International NGO Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could be a strong tool for advocacy.
- It might lead to more partnerships focused on accountability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $30600000, High: $71400000)
Year 3: $52020000 (Low: $31212000, High: $72828000)
Year 5: $53040000 (Low: $31824000, High: $74256000)
Year 10: $54100800 (Low: $32460480, High: $75741120)
Year 100: $65342222 (Low: $39205334, High: $91479067)
Key Considerations
- Judicial resources will need enhancement to manage potential increases in caseloads.
- Legal and procedural training could increase operational costs initially.
- This legislative change may affect international perceptions of the U.S. legal environment, influencing international business strategies.