This case reverses the Second Circuit in In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, which I covered previously in this post. Petitioners are U.S. based purchasers of vitamin C, who alleged Chinese manufacturers of vitamin C engaged in price-fixing in violation of the Sherman Act. The Second Circuit reversed the jury verdict, holding that the case should have been dismissed based on China's submission regarding the interpretation of Chinese laws.
The Supreme Court reversed the Second Circuit's standard of "binding so long as facially reasonable." Instead, it held "a government's expressed view of its own law is ordinarily entitled to substantial but not conclusive weight".
I welcomed the Second Circuit's ruling in the run-up to this case, so naturally I am a bit disappointed here. I don't think the Supreme Court necessarily got this wrong in relation to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 44.1, but I believe there was enough room to affirm the Second Circuit's standard.