Related videos:
The legal battle over properties confiscated after the Cuban Revolution has returned to the forefront of the U.S. judicial system. The government of Donald Trump decided to formally support ExxonMobil in the Supreme Court in a lawsuit seeking compensation for oil assets expropriated in Cuba more than sixty years ago, a move that could signify a turning point in the enforcement of the Helms-Burton Act.
The Supreme Court authorized the Department of Justice to share argument time with the oil company during the hearing on February 23rd, in the case Exxon v. Corporación Cimex, a clear indication of the political interest surrounding the litigation, according to a report by E&E News by POLITICO.
Exxon claims about 70 million dollars, valued at 1960 prices, for gas stations and oil refineries that belonged to its Panamanian subsidiary Esso Standard Oil and were nationalized by Fidel Castro's government in 1960. The company argues that Cuban state entities such as CUPET and the military conglomerate CIMEX are directly responsible for those losses.
The legal dispute revolves around the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which establishes that states cannot be sued in the courts of other countries, except for very specific exceptions.
In 2024, an appeals court in Washington concluded that Exxon did not meet those requirements. Far from retreating, the oil company raised the stakes and asked the Supreme Court to completely eliminate the immunity of the Cuban state, arguing that Title III of the Helms-Burton Act allows for this.
The Trump administration supports this interpretation. In a filing presented as amicus curiae, the government argued that sovereign immunity imposes "undue burdens" on plaintiffs and that the Helms-Burton Act, on its own, should be sufficient to open the door to claims.
The Attorney General justified the stance as a matter of "paramount interests" in foreign policy, citing a presidential memorandum from January 2025 regarding the tightening of policy towards Cuba.
However, even legal experts acknowledge the contradictions in the approach. Although Exxon could obtain a favorable ruling, it remains unclear how it would be enforced, given that Cuba does not hold significant assets in the United States. “You have your Helms-Burton ruling, where are you going to execute it?” questioned attorney Robert Muse, a specialist in litigation related to the island.
The case of Exxon is not alone. Other lawsuits driven by American corporations are proceeding in parallel, such as that of Havana Docks Corporation against several cruise lines for the use of docks in Havana between 2016 and 2019. Both cases will be heard on the same day by the Supreme Court, a rare occurrence for a law that, in almost thirty years, has resulted in few effective rulings.
For many analysts, these legal actions are part of a broader strategy that combines economic pressure, political lobbying, and U.S. courts to lay the groundwork for a potential regime change in Cuba.
Filed under: