The allegations were startling: Plaintiffs accused Coke and its Colombian bottling subsidiaries of conspiring in the torture and murder of trade unionists by Colombian paramilitary forces. But first the district court and now an appellate panel found that they hadn't pled sufficient facts to establish subject matter jurisdiction.

It's a testament to both the importance and the uncertainties of Alien Tort Statute litigation that ATS cases keep igniting crucial divisions not only between the federal appellate courts, but within them as well.

The same week the Second Circuit gutted the Alien Tort Statute in a case involving Shell in Nigeria, a state court judge in Los Angeles dismissed a case against Dole over killings in Columbia on statute of limitations grounds.

The case is a prime example of why ATS litigation is frustrating on both sides. The plaintiffs' lawyer says he can't identify his clients because he fears for their safety. Chiquita, meanwhile, is forced to defend against non-specific--but heinous--allegations.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday signaled it is not done dealing with the question of using U.S. courts as a forum for resolving disputes with multinational corporations over their role in overseas human rights abuses.

We've been pretty down on the prospects for Alien Tort Statute cases lately, but in a pair of recent rulings, there's a ray of hope for plaintiffs.

In a decade-old Alien Tort Claims Act case, defense lawyers for DynCorp cited concerns that handing over discovery material might reveal the flight paths of U.S. State Department contractors to narco-terrorists in the Andean jungle.