Corporate Media Runs Cover for a Corporate Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court refused to punish Nestle and Cargill for profiting off child slave labor on the same day Congress made Juneteenth a national holiday. Guess what received more coverage?
The Supreme Court recently announced decisions on a number of cases ranging from upholding the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act to effectively legalizing the right for American corporations to profit off child slavery. Guess which story received more coverage in mainstream media?
After these decisions were announced the New York Times praised the Supreme Court, which is dominated by a 6-3 majority of right-wing justices, for “having a surprisingly good run”. The article stresses that Trump appointee Brett Kavanaugh is now at the court’s “ideological center”. It also emphasized the courts upholding of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) as an example of the court's moderation, rather than an example of corporate control since the ACA is effectively a giveaway to the private health insurance industry. Despite what the insurance industry will tell you since the ACA was enacted the private insurance industry has seen record profits.
What the article doesn’t tell you is that in the same week the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act, it also ruled in favor of corporate food giants Nestle and Cargill in a case attempting to hold them accountable for profiting off child slave labor. This lawsuit was brought to the Supreme Court by six Mali citizens that sued Nestle and Cargill more than a decade ago under the Alien Tort Statute.
The Alien Tort Statute is an 18th-century law that according to Cornell Law School, “serves as a statutory instrument for gaining universal jurisdiction over violations of international law.”. Under the ATS a lawsuit can proceed for any harm resulting from a violation of international law “no matter where the harm occurred…as long as the plaintiff serves process in U.S. Territory.”. Consequently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit allowed the case to move forward “on the grounds that Nestle and Cargill had allegedly made ‘major operational decisions in the United States.”
Unfortunately, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion which said that the plaintiffs “improperly sought to sue under the Alien Tort Statute for conduct that occurred outside the United States.” as a result, the court ruled 8-1 in favor of Nestle and Cargill. According to the Supreme Court:
“Because respondents’ injuries occurred overseas and the only domestic conduct alleged by respondents was general corporate activity, the District Court dismissed the suit as an impermissible extraterritorial application of the ATS under Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co.”
Common Dreams has reported that the Supreme Court refused to punish Nestle and Cargill for profiting off child slave labor because plaintiffs “had not proven the companies’ activities in the U.S. were sufficiently tied to the alleged child trafficking.” This essentially means that the only reason Nestle and Cargill weren’t held accountable for profiting off child slave labor is that the conduct didn’t occur on American soil. This is an extremely dangerous precedent to set.
Obama Administration official, Neal Katyal represented Nestle and Cargill and argued that they “could not be sued for complicity in child trafficking because they are corporations, not individuals.” according to Common Dreams. This defense flies in the face of previous rulings by the Supreme Court which essentially say that corporations are entitled to the same rights as individuals. If a corporation can be entitled to the same rights as an individual it should also be held equally accountable under the law.
Paul Hoffman, a lawyer representing the children that have been trafficked into slave labor told CNBC that the decision was obviously disappointing. However, he noted that the silver lining in the decision was that “a majority of justices…agreed that corporations can be sued under the Alien Tort Statute.” They’re just pretending that they’re powerless and have no accountability over what U.S. corporations do off American soil.
Hoffman also said he intends to “file an amended complaint” that he hopes will be accepted by the court. Hoffman has demanded that Nestle and Cargill be held accountable for “abetting a system of child slavery” since they “control every aspect of what goes on in the production of cocoa in Ivory Coast”.
General Counsel for EarthRights International, the organization that filed an amicus brief on behalf of the plaintiffs, Marco Simons, told Common Dreams:
“The ruling implies that U.S. corporations whose executives decide, from comfortable American boardrooms, to profit from murder, torture, and slavery abroad cannot be sued in U.S. federal courts for violating international law…This ruling has disturbing implications for future victims of human rights abuses seeking justice against businesses in U.S. courts. This ruling also sets a dangerous precedent, giving corporations impunity for profiting from human rights abuses.”
The New York Times article also failed to mention that according to data obtained by the Constitutional Accountability Center, the Supreme Court sides with the Chamber of Commerce 70% of the time, regardless of whether or not the decision is considered conservative or liberal. In many of these cases, even the liberal justices have sided with corporate interests over the interests of their workers and society in general. Just look at this 8-1 ruling in defense of child slave labor. There was also another 8-1 ruling on June 21st that handed a victory to Wall Street firms by shielding them from securities laws.
The Daily Poster has reported that in this term alone, “the court has sided with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — the major corporate lobby group in Washington — in seven separate cases, and only defied the Chamber in two cases.”. A Daily Poster article from June 2020 explained that the Supreme Court has become one of the most powerful weapons of the ruling class:
“for all the focus on the court’s rulings on important social issues, much of the justices’ work is on business litigation — and in that role the court now serves as a reliable star chamber defending corporations and the wealthy.”
The court’s recent decision that helped shield Nestle and Cargill from being held accountable for profiting off child slave labor proves that it will go to extreme lengths to cover for the abusive practices of big business. It should come as no surprise that the Supreme Court turned a blind eye to corporations profiting off child slavery, and it should be equally unsurprising that mainstream media is running cover for the court by ignoring the Nestle and Cargill case while playing up its decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act.
In reality, the court’s decision to uphold the ACA is better than the alternative of striking it down and throwing millions of people off their health insurance plans, even if those plans are inadequate and overpriced. However, I wouldn’t expect a Supreme Court that’s in the pocket of big business as much as this one to strike down a program that has continued to allow private health insurance corporations to continue raking in “record-breaking” profits.
Finally, in true American fashion, the Supreme Court ruled in defense of child slavery, while on the same day Congress also voted to make Juneteenth a national holiday. A perfect representation of how the United States is always willing to make a symbolic gesture towards progress while doing everything it can to undermine it in the process.
If Congress actually wanted to do something meaningful to combat the legacy of slavery they would step in where the Supreme Court has failed and pass “binding legislation that holds corporations accountable for violating human rights.”. Don’t hold your breath expecting that to happen though. The same corporate interests that have hijacked the Supreme Court have also hijacked Congress and the mainstream media that we’re told provides objective coverage of both.
Matt Dougherty is an independent journalist and managing editor at The Bull-Moose Note. You can subscribe here to get our articles delivered directly to your inbox. If you’d like to support our work, which is always made available for free, you can give a one-time donation through Venmo or become a monthly supporter for $3, $6, or $12 per month through Patreon.