Justices Hear First Cases Testing Decades-Old Cuban Seizures Law

The Supreme Court signaled skepticism that Congress meant to give leaseholders an unlimited right to sue over property seized decades ago by Cuba.

Two cases argued on Monday involving Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines and Exxon Mobil Corp. test whether Congress intended to authorize private suits over property seizures by the Castro regime not merely as a way to recover compensatory damages, but as a deliberate instrument of economic pressure on the Cuban government.

In the first case, Havana Docks Corp. is seeking hundreds of millions of dollars from four cruise lines that used the Port of Havana from 2016 to 2019 after the Obama administration eased travel restrictions. The company held a 99-year lease to operate the port from 1905 to 2004, but Cuba seized the property in 1960.

The suit was brought under Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, a 1996 law that allows claims against companies that knowingly traffic in confiscated property. The case is the court’s first look at a claim under Title III, which had been suspended by every president until 2019, when President Donald Trump allowed suits to proceed.

A district judge ordered the cruise lines to pay damages to Havana Docks for using the port, but the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed—finding the suit failed because, had there been no seizure, the company’s lease would’ve expired anyway more than a decade prior.

Richard Klingler of Ellis George, counsel for Havana Docks, argued Congress placed no statute of limitations on claims. The Trump administration echoed that view, contending the Helms-Burton Act was designed not merely to provide compensation, but to exert “harsh economic pressure” on the Cuban government.

Several justices, however, questioned whether the statute permits repeated recoveries potentially greatly exceeding the value of the original lease—particularly for alleged violations long after its expiration.

“I don’t know what entitles you to ad nauseam compensation for use by everyone, forever,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said.

Justice Neil Gorsuch similarly pressed counsel on whether the theory would allow damages “over and over and over again.”

The justices also heard a second Helms-Burton case over oil and gas assets seized by Cuba. Exxon Mobil is the plaintiff in that appeal over Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

The cases are Havana Docks Corp v. Royal Caribbean Cruises et al, U.S., No. 24-983 and Exxon Mobil Corp v. Corporación CIMEX S.A., U.S., No. 24-699, argued on 2/23/26.