On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. European Community, holding that provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) apply to conduct that occurs outside the United States only if the conduct violates an underlying predicate statute that itself applies extraterritorially. The Court also held that RICO’s private cause of action does not overcome the presumption against extraterritoriality. A private plaintiff must demonstrate "a domestic injury to its business or property" and the statute "does not allow recovery for foreign injuries." As a result, private plaintiffs whose injuries occur outside the United States may not sue under RICO.

The Supreme Court’s decision is significant because it continues a line of recent decisions in which the Court has sought to restrict plaintiffs’ ability to apply U.S. law to, and to bring claims in the U.S. courts based on, extraterritorial conduct. In Morrison v. National Australian Bank, the Court established a presumption that U.S. statutes do not apply extraterritorially absent clear indication in the text of the statute that Congress intended that they do. Similarly, in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, the Court held that the Alien Tort Statute did not confer U.S. court jurisdiction over tort claims involving conduct abroad.