context: As cognizable ATS claims are based on binding international law norms, they necessarily involve claims where there is a great deal of international consensus.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 70 F.3d 250, 250
citation_a.parenthetical: noting that "it would be a rare case in which the act of state doctrine precluded suit under section 1350"
citation_a.sentence: See Doe I, 395 F.3d at 959 (noting that “[b]e-cause jus cogens violations are, by definition, internationally denounced, there is a high degree of international consensus against them”); Liu Qi at 1296 (same); see also Kadic, 70 F.3d at 250 (noting that “it would be a rare case in which the act of state doctrine precluded suit under section 1350”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 395 F.3d 959, 959
citation_b.parenthetical: noting that "[b]e-cause jus cogens violations are, by definition, internationally denounced, there is a high degree of international consensus against them"
citation_b.sentence: See Doe I, 395 F.3d at 959 (noting that “[b]e-cause jus cogens violations are, by definition, internationally denounced, there is a high degree of international consensus against them”); Liu Qi at 1296 (same); see also Kadic, 70 F.3d at 250 (noting that “it would be a rare case in which the act of state doctrine precluded suit under section 1350”).