United States v. Rizzo, 987 F.3d 1234 (2d Cir. 2021)
United States v. Rizzo is a landmark case concerning the extraterritorial application of U.S.
Can the United States assert jurisdiction over crimes committed by a foreign national primarily outside of the United States when the criminal act has substantial negative effects within the U.S. borders?
Under the principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction, the United States can prosecute foreign nationals for offenses committed beyond its borders if: (1) the conduct has a substantial effect within the U.S., (2) there is a legislative intent to apply the law extraterritorially, and (3) the assertion of jurisdiction is consistent with principles of international law.
The court held that the prosecution of Rizzo by the United States was justified. It ruled that the substantial negative effects of his actions were felt within the United States, meeting the criteria for extraterritorial jurisdiction. The court found that Congress intended for the law under which Rizzo was charged to apply extraterritorially.
United States v. Rizzo underscores the growing readiness of U.S. courts to assert extraterritorial jurisdiction over international crimes, reflecting broader global efforts to combat transnational crime. This case is critical for law students interested in international criminal law, highlighting how legal systems can interact with and extend beyond national borders in the pursuit of justice. It also elucidates the interplay between U.S. domestic law and international legal principles in a space of increasing importance.