In the United States, all companies must adhere to strict prohibitions against religious discrimination. But do these prohibitions still apply if the allegedly persecuted individuals live in a different country while practicing a faith that most Americans have never heard of? This is a question the Supreme Court will have to answer, as an American tech company has been accused of persecuting the “Falun Gong” movement in China.
Tech Giant Accused of Building Chinese Surveillance State That Targets Religious Minorities
In early January of 2026, ABC News reported that the Supreme Court had agreed to hear an appeal by one of the biggest tech companies in the country, a tech company that was trying to avoid a lawsuit regarding religious discrimination. According to the allegations, this tech company helped China spy on and persecute members of the Falun Gong “spiritual movement” by building its famous surveillance state from the ground up.
This story has been developing since 2025, when a notable report exposed the tech giant’s involvement in the design and construction of China’s surveillance systems. This system is collectively known as the “Golden Shield,” and the tech company allegedly saw the project as a golden opportunity to cash in.
Fully aware that the Chinese government viewed Falun Gong as “evil,” the tech company committed itself to helping the regime track down and identify members of this spiritual movement. Falun Gong first sued the tech company back in 2011, going as far as to accuse the company of helping the Chinese torture these religious individuals.
As ABC News notes, it is often difficult to bring foreign governments to justice in US courts. This is despite the fact that (as of this writing), the US government is trying to bring a Venezuelan leader to justice in a New York court. Nevertheless, the success of this Falun Gong lawsuit will hinge on whether the tech company is legally required to follow the country’s age-old prohibition against religious discrimination while acting on behalf of a foreign government in a different country.
The two relevant laws are the Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act, which both could theoretically hold US entities accountable for actions on foreign soil. Of course, there is also the Constitution to consider. This document clearly states that people should be free to practice whatever faith they like, free from persecution or favoritism. Although there are virtually no legal penalties for a company violating the Constitution, one might argue that this kind of conduct is inherently un-American.
Putting aside the constitutional argument, the revelations involved in this lawsuit are stunning. US politicians often criticize China for its lack of freedoms, its persecution of minority groups, its censorship, and its “mass-surveillance” systems. If the allegations in this lawsuit are true, it would seem that the US private interests built this mass-surveillance state and raked in the profits.