Plain-English summary
Unanimously reverses Ninth Circuit on FSIA personal-jurisdiction rule in Devas v. Antrix
The Court unanimously held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's personal-jurisdiction provision does not create an independent grant of jurisdiction separate from the statute's subject-matter rules. The Ninth Circuit's judgment was reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings consistent with that holding.
Why this matters
The decision clarifies that foreign states sued in U.S. courts under the FSIA still must satisfy the Constitution's limits on personal jurisdiction (for example, due process) and any applicable statutory rules beyond mere FSIA service. That affects when U.S. courts can exercise authority over foreign sovereigns and state-owned entities and influences how plaintiffs choose where and how to sue them.
Who may feel it
- Foreign states and state-owned entities sued in U.S. courts
- U.S. plaintiffs seeking to sue foreign governments or their agencies
- Federal courts deciding jurisdictional questions under the FSIA
- International litigants and arbitration award holders enforcing judgments in the U.S.
Key questions
- Does the FSIA clause stating that personal jurisdiction exists upon service under section 1608 create an independent statutory grant of personal jurisdiction separate from subsection (a)'s subject-matter provisions?