The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) approved using Mexican nationals to abduct Alvarez-Machain, also a Mexican national, from Mexico to stand trial in the United States for a DEA agent’s torture and murder. After his acquittal, Alvarez sued the United States for false arrest under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), which waives the sovereign immunity of the United States in suits “for . . . personal injury . . . caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any [government] employees while acting within the scope of his office or employment.” However, the Act limits its waiver of sovereign immunity in a number of ways, including an exception for “[a]ny claim arising in a foreign country.” The U.S. district court dismissed the FTCA claim against the DEA, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal. What arguments can Alvarez-Machain make to support his FTCA claim against the U.S. government? What arguments can the United States make to support the dismissal of Alvarez-Machain’s suit? Which party will prevail? [Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004).]