Underhill v. Hernandez
Citation and Court
168 U.S. 250 (1897), Supreme Court of the United States
Facts
Underhill, an American citizen, operated a waterworks system in Venezuela. General Hernandez, commanding Venezuelan revolutionary forces, detained Underhill and refused to give him a passport to leave the country. After the revolution succeeded and was recognized, Underhill sued Hernandez in U.S. courts for wrongful detention.
Issue
Whether U.S. courts may adjudicate the legality of acts committed by a foreign government within its own territory in the exercise of its governmental authority.
Holding
U.S. courts will not sit in judgment on the acts of a foreign sovereign government committed within its own territory; the act of state doctrine requires that such acts be respected by U.S. courts.
Rule / Doctrine
Every sovereign state is bound to respect the independence of every other sovereign state, and U.S. courts will not examine the validity of the acts of a foreign sovereign taken within its own territory. This is the foundational statement of the act of state doctrine.
Significance
Underhill v. Hernandez is the Supreme Court’s seminal act of state doctrine case, establishing the rule that U.S. courts will defer to the acts of foreign sovereigns within their own territory. It was elaborated in Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino and remains the starting point for act of state analysis.