Not Just High Seas: Fourth Circuit Uses Pirate Analogy to Uphold $42M Abu Ghraib Verdict

Article by: Matthew Saliman, Associate

The long-running litigation arising from alleged detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib prison has reached another significant milestone. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit largely affirmed a $42 million jury verdict against CACI Premier Technology Inc., rejecting the contractor’s attempt to overturn liability stemming from its interrogation services performed under a U.S. Army contract.

As discussed in our earlier coverage of this case, the litigation has been ongoing for more than seventeen years and has repeatedly tested the limits of contractor liability when operating in support of U.S. military missions overseas. See our earlier posts discussing the background of the litigation and the 2024 jury verdict.

The Fourth Circuit’s decision affirms that verdict after extensive briefing on jurisdictional and liability issues under the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”).

A central issue on appeal was whether the plaintiffs’ claims could proceed under the ATS given that the alleged conduct occurred in Iraq. CACI argued that the case involved an impermissible extraterritorial application of the statute. The Fourth Circuit rejected that argument and concluded that the presumption against extraterritoriality did not bar the claims.

First, the court held that the United States exercised complete jurisdiction and control over Iraqi detention facilities during the relevant period in 2003. Because the United States effectively controlled the prison system at that time, the court reasoned that conduct at Abu Ghraib during that period could be treated as occurring within U.S. territorial jurisdiction for purposes of the ATS analysis.

Second, the court emphasized the status of torture under international law. Drawing on longstanding ATS jurisprudence, the court explained that a torturer, like a pirate historically, has been treated as an “enemy of all mankind.” Because of the gravity of those violations, the court concluded that the alleged conspiracy to commit torture falls within the category of offenses subject to universal jurisdiction.

Finally, the Fourth Circuit concluded that sufficient conduct connected to the alleged wrongdoing occurred in the United States to support ATS jurisdiction. The court pointed to domestic actions such as hiring interrogators, issuing security clearances, and handling reports of detainee abuse, concluding that those actions were sufficiently tied to the alleged violations of international law.

The court also confirmed that conspiracy liability may be recognized under the ATS. Surveying international law sources, including post-World War II war crimes tribunals and international criminal statutes, the court determined that conspiracy to commit torture reflects a well-established norm of international law capable of supporting civil liability.

While the decision included a dissent arguing that the claims represent an impermissible extraterritorial application of the ATS, the majority concluded that the case falls squarely within the statute’s historical purpose of providing a federal forum for violations of international law attributable to U.S. actors.

Read the full court decision here.

For government contractors, the ruling reinforces a key lesson that has emerged throughout this litigation. Performing work in support of U.S. military operations does not automatically insulate contractors from civil liability when alleged conduct implicates universally recognized violations of international law. The decision underscores the importance of robust compliance programs, effective oversight, and strict adherence to applicable interrogation, detention, and human rights standards during overseas operations.