From our private database of 32,400+ case briefs...
Ralls Corp. v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
758 F.3d 296 (2014)
In 2012, Ralls Corporation (Ralls) (plaintiff) purchased four American limited-liability companies (project companies) that were previously formed to develop windfarms in Oregon. The project companies’ sites were located in and around restricted airspace and bombing zones maintained by the United States Navy. The owners of Ralls were both Chinese nationals. Ralls submitted a notice to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) (defendant) to inform it of Ralls’s acquisition and why Ralls did not believe it was a national-security threat. CFIUS initiated a review and determined that Ralls’s acquisition of the project companies threatened national security and issued temporary mitigation orders to restrict Ralls’s access to the project companies’ sites and prevent construction at the sites (CFIUS order). The matter was submitted to the president of the United States (defendant). After considering information regarding Ralls’s transaction’s effect on national security, the president, like CFIUS, determined that Ralls was a threat to national security. The president issued a permanent order (presidential order) that prohibited Ralls’s purchase of the project companies and required Ralls to divest itself from them. Neither CFIUS nor the president provided Ralls the opportunity to review and rebut the evidence they relied upon to make their determinations. Ralls sued CFIUS and the president in district court, claiming that the CFIUS order and presidential order violated Ralls’s constitutional due-process rights. The district court dismissed the claim, finding that Ralls did not have constitutionally protected property interests because Ralls acquired its property interests subject to the risk of a presidential veto and waived the opportunity to obtain a determination from CFIUS and the president before entering the transaction. Ralls appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Henderson, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 587,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 587,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 32,400 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.