WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court is being urged by two Republican lawmakers to allow a lawsuit to advance against Cisco Systems, Inc. The tech conglomerate faces accusations that its technology was instrumental in the persecution of the Falun Gong religious movement in China.
Representatives Chris Smith from New Jersey and John Moolenaar from Michigan have reached out to the Trump administration’s top Supreme Court advocate, D. John Sauer. In their communication, they advocate for the administration to back the Falun Gong plaintiffs and facilitate the lawsuit’s progression to trial.
Smith, who co-leads the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, and Moolenaar, head of a special House committee on China, are both vocal opponents of China’s human rights practices. They referenced an AP report which highlighted the role of American tech firms in constructing China’s surveillance framework, emphasizing the importance of dissuading U.S. companies from enabling human rights violations by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
The Supreme Court is evaluating Cisco’s challenge, which is centered around the claim that U.S. law does not support such lawsuits. In considering this, the court has sought input from the solicitor general, who articulates the U.S. government’s stance in court proceedings.
The Trump administration’s perspective holds significant weight, especially since Cisco argues the lawsuit pertains to U.S. foreign policy and should be dropped. The solicitor general is anticipated to submit a brief on the matter in the near future.
“The allegation that an American tech company custom-designed a tool to facilitate the violent persecution of a religious minority by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is a serious one,” Smith and Moolenaar stated in their letter to Sauer. “We believe the Plaintiffs deserve the chance to prove their claims.”
A Cisco representative noted, “We have a longstanding commitment to uphold and respect human rights for all people and if the 2023 ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court stands, it opens the floodgates for suits against U.S. corporations merely for legal exports of off-the-shelf goods and services.”
This case, which has its roots over ten years ago, began in 2008 when leaked documents revealed Cisco’s view of China’s “Golden Shield” as a business opportunity, with materials indicating that their products could detect a vast majority of Falun Gong content online. By 2011, Falun Gong adherents had filed a lawsuit against Cisco, accusing the company of developing technology for Beijing to track and detain believers.
The central question for the Supreme Court is whether U.S. companies can be held accountable under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) for aiding human rights abuses. Although a federal appeals court ruled in 2023 that the case could proceed, Cisco is appealing for the Supreme Court to overturn this decision.
Historically, both the Supreme Court and U.S. administrations, regardless of party, have been cautious about using American courts to address foreign governmental actions. However, the Falun Gong plaintiffs argue that much of Cisco’s China-related activities occurred within the U.S.
According to a recent AP investigation, the U.S. government, under both Republican and Democratic leadership, has persistently permitted and sometimes bolstered American firms in selling technology to Chinese security entities. Activists have consistently voiced concerns that such technologies are employed to suppress dissent and persecute minority groups.
As leaders Donald Trump and Xi Jinping prepare for an anticipated meeting, the issue of U.S. tech sales to China remains a contentious topic, with significant financial implications and technology leadership at stake. Following the meeting, Trump announced that China would engage with Nvidia regarding chip purchases.
The debate over technology sales to China has intensified, with some advocating for stricter measures. Conversely, American companies argue that restrictions would drive China to bolster its domestic capabilities, potentially enhancing its competitive edge in artificial intelligence.
Despite these opinions, national security experts caution that selling such technology could bolster China’s military and intelligence sectors. Lawyers for the plaintiffs echo these concerns, referencing Cisco’s marketing in China, which included promoting routers for military use.
Should the court rule against Cisco, it could set a precedent for holding American firms accountable for overseas misuse of their technology.
