## Facts

- Approximately twenty asylum seekers, led by Hawa Abdi Jama, were detained by federal immigration authorities at a facility in Elizabeth, New Jersey, operated by a private contractor under a government contract.
- Plaintiffs alleged overcrowding and unsanitary, degrading living conditions, including insufficient beds, sleeping on floors, persistent odors from nearby toilets, and continuous lighting that disrupted sleep.
- Plaintiffs alleged physical, psychological, and sexual abuse by facility staff, and interference with religious practices.
- After a June 1995 uprising, the facility closed and detainees were transferred to other detention locations.
- Plaintiffs alleged federal immigration officials and contractor personnel knew or should have known of the conditions and abuses but failed to prevent or correct them.

## Issues

1. Whether detained noncitizens may state claims under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) for alleged inhumane detention conditions and abuse amounting to violations of the law of nations.
2. Whether a private U.S. corporation operating a detention facility under federal contract may be sued under the ATCA for alleged violations of international human rights norms.
3. Whether the existence of domestic federal and state remedies requires dismissal of ATCA claims at the pleading stage.
4. Whether immunity doctrines asserted by federal defendants required dismissal of claims at the motion-to-dismiss stage.

## Decision

- The court denied the motion to dismiss in substantial part as to the plaintiffs’ core ATCA-based claims.
- The court held the complaint sufficiently alleged conduct that, if proven, could violate specific, universal, and obligatory norms recognized as part of the law of nations.
- The court rejected the argument that available domestic remedies made ATCA claims unavailable or improper at the pleading stage.
- The court permitted ATCA-based claims to proceed against the private detention contractor.
- The court allowed the case to proceed into discovery on surviving federal and state claims as addressed in the opinion.

## Legal Principles

- The ATCA provides jurisdiction for civil actions by aliens for torts committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.
- At the pleading stage, allegations of severe mistreatment and inhumane detention conditions may support an ATCA claim when the alleged norm is sufficiently definite, universally accepted, and obligatory.
- The presence of parallel domestic remedies does not automatically bar ATCA claims; plaintiffs may pursue domestic and international-law theories simultaneously when otherwise adequately pleaded.
- A private corporation may be a proper ATCA defendant when the alleged conduct plausibly constitutes a violation of actionable international law norms in a custodial detention setting.

## Conclusion

The court permitted detained asylum seekers to proceed on ATCA-based human rights claims arising from alleged abuse and inhumane conditions at a privately operated federal immigration detention facility, holding that adequate domestic remedies did not require dismissal and that a private contractor could face ATCA liability at the pleading stage.


Jama v. U.S. I.N.S., 22 F. Supp. 2d 353 (D.N.J. 1998)