The US Supreme Court made a decision about Cisco Systems. Now, it is harder for people to sue companies in the US for things that happen in other countries.

美國最高法院對 Cisco Systems 作出了決定。現在，人們很難因為在其他國家發生的事情而在美國起訴公司。

Some people from the Falun Gong group sued Cisco. They said Cisco helped the Chinese government find and hurt them. They said Cisco made a system to watch people.

一些法輪功團體的人起訴了 Cisco。他們稱 Cisco 幫助中國政府找到並傷害他們。他們表示 Cisco 建立了一套監控系統來監視人們。

The Court looked at an old law from 1789. The judges said only Congress can make new rules for these cases. The judges did not want to make new rules themselves.

法院查看了 1789 年的一部舊法律。法官表示只有國會才能為此類案件制定新規則。法官們不想自行制定新規則。

One judge, Sonia Sotomayor, disagreed. She said this is bad for people who are hurt in other countries. She thinks victims need a way to get help.

其中一名法官 Sonia Sotomayor 不同意。她表示這對在其他國家受傷害的人來說是不利的。她認為受害者需要有獲得幫助的途徑。

The case against Cisco is over. Now, foreign victims cannot easily use US courts to fight companies.

針對 Cisco 的案件已經結束。現在，外國受害者無法輕易利用美國法院來對抗公司。

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Cisco Systems, making it more difficult for people to use US courts to sue companies for human rights violations committed in other countries.

美國最高法院裁定思科系統（Cisco Systems）勝訴，使得人們更難透過美國法院起訴在其他國家犯下人權侵害罪的公司。

The case began when members of Falun Gong claimed that Cisco Systems helped the Chinese government persecute their group. The plaintiffs argued that the company created the 'Golden Shield,' a surveillance system used by the Chinese Communist Party to track and torture political opponents. Although a lower court had previously allowed the case to continue in 2023, the Supreme Court has now reversed that decision.

本案始於法輪功成員指控思科系統協助中國政府迫害其團體。原告主張該公司創建了名為「金盾」的監控系統，中國共產黨利用該系統追蹤並折磨政治對手。儘管下級法院曾在 2023 年允許此案繼續審理，但最高法院現在推翻了該決定。

The Court focused on the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) of 1789. For a long time, this law was not used, but starting in the 1980s, it became a way to hold companies responsible for helping with overseas abuses. However, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that only Congress, not the courts, has the power to create new legal reasons for lawsuits. This decision follows a trend since 2013, where the Court has required a strong connection between the alleged crime and the United States.

法院將重點放在 1789 年的《外國人侵權法》（ATS）。長期以來，這部法律並未被使用，但從 1980 年代開始，它成為了追究公司協助海外虐待行為責任的一種方式。然而，大法官艾米·康尼·巴雷特寫道，只有國會而非法院，才有權創造新的訴訟法律理由。這一決定延續了自 2013 年以來的趨勢，即法院要求指控的罪行與美國之間必須有強而有力的聯繫。

Furthermore, the Court discussed the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA). It decided that this law does not allow lawsuits against companies for helping with torture unless Congress explicitly says so. Justice Sonia Sotomayor disagreed with this view. She emphasized that the ruling is a step backward for victims of foreign abuses and argued that the Court ignored previous legal precedents.

此外，法院討論了《酷刑受害者保護法》（TVPA）。法院決定，除非國會明確規定，否則該法不允許針對協助酷刑的公司提起訴訟。大法官索尼婭·索托馬約爾不同意這一觀點。她強調該裁決對於外國虐待受害者而言是一種退步，並認為法院無視了之前的法律先例。

This ruling ends the lawsuit against Cisco Systems and significantly reduces the legal options for foreign victims seeking justice in U.S. courts.

這項裁決終結了對思科系統的訴訟，並顯著減少了外國受害者在美國法院尋求正義的法律選擇。

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Cisco Systems, effectively limiting the application of federal statutes used to litigate international human rights abuses within domestic courts.

美國最高法院裁定思科系統（Cisco Systems）勝訴，有效地限制了在國內法院訴訟國際人權侵害時所適用的聯邦法令。

The litigation originated from claims brought by practitioners of Falun Gong, who alleged that Cisco Systems facilitated the Chinese government's persecution of their movement. The plaintiffs asserted that the corporation designed and implemented the 'Golden Shield,' a surveillance apparatus utilized by the Chinese Communist Party to identify, track, and torture dissidents. While the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously revived the case in 2023—concluding that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged the provision of essential technical assistance with knowledge of likely international law violations—the Supreme Court reversed this determination.

這起訴訟源於法輪功修行者的指控，他們聲稱思科系統（Cisco Systems）協助中國政府迫害其運動。原告主張該公司設計並實施了「金盾工程」，這是一個由中國共產黨用於識別、追蹤及折磨異見人士的監控裝置。雖然第九巡迴上訴法院曾於 2023 年恢復此案——認定原告合理地指控思科在已知可能違反國際法的情況下提供了關鍵技術援助——但最高法院推翻了這一裁定。

Central to the judicial deliberation was the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) of 1789. Although dormant for nearly two centuries, the ATS was utilized starting in the 1980s to establish accomplice liability for corporations aiding and abetting overseas abuses. The Court's majority, in an opinion authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, posited that the authority to recognize new causes of action resides exclusively with Congress rather than the judiciary. This ruling aligns with a broader judicial trend observed since 2013, wherein the Court has emphasized the necessity of a substantial nexus between the alleged conduct and the United States, as evidenced in previous rulings involving Cargill Inc and Nestlé SA.

司法審議的核心是 1789 年的《外國人侵權法》（ATS）。儘管該法幾乎沉睡了兩個世紀，但自 1980 年代起，ATS 被用於確立協助海外侵害行為的企業應承擔的共犯責任。由大法官 Amy Coney Barrett 撰寫的多數意見書認為，承認新訴權的權限僅屬於國會而非司法部門。這一裁決符合自 2013 年起觀察到的廣泛司法趨勢，即法院強調指控行為與美國之間必須存在實質關聯，這在先前涉及 Cargill Inc 和 Nestlé SA 的裁決中已有體現。

Furthermore, the Court addressed the Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA), determining that the statute does not permit lawsuits against entities for aiding and abetting torture absent explicit congressional authorization. This decision prompted a dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who characterized the ruling as a regression in the pursuit of accountability for victims of foreign abuses and argued that the Court effectively overruled previous precedents without formal acknowledgment.

此外，法院處理了《酷刑受害者保護法》（TVPA），判定在缺乏國會明確授權的情況下，該法令不允許對協助及教唆酷刑的實體提起訴訟。這一決定引起了大法官 Sonia Sotomayor 的異議，她將此裁決定格為追求海外侵害受害者問責進程中的倒退，並認為法院實際上在未正式承認的情況下推翻了先前的判例。

The ruling concludes the lawsuit against Cisco Systems and significantly narrows the legal avenues available for foreign plaintiffs seeking redress for international law violations in U.S. courts.

該裁決終結了針對思科系統的訴訟，並大幅縮小了外國原告在美國法院為國際法侵害尋求救濟的法律途徑。