# 62


III-1.1000                         
                                        April 6, 1993

DJ 202-PL-226





Ms. Becky J. Smith
Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff & Tichy
300 Crescent Court
Suite 600
Dallas, Texas  75201

Dear Ms. Smith:

     This letter is in response to your request for guidance
regarding the applicability of title III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA") to facilities that are owned by American
companies and located outside the United States. 

     The ADA authorizes this Department to provide technical
assistance to individuals and entities that have rights or
responsibilities under the ADA.  Accordingly, this letter
provides informal guidance to assist you in understanding the ADA
requirements.  However, this technical assistance does not
constitute a legal interpretation and is not binding on the
Department of Justice.

     Although the question you have raised has not been decided
by the Federal courts, there is considerable reason to doubt
title III's ability to reach American-owned companies that are
located outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United
States. 

     It is a well-established principle of statutory construction
that legislation enacted by Congress does not extend beyond the
territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless there is
evidence of clear legislative intent to the contrary.  E.E.O.C.v. 
Arabian American Oil Co., 59 U.S.L.W. 4225, 4226 (U.S. March
26, 1991); Foley Bros., Inc. v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281, 285
(1949).   
 
     Title III of the ADA does not contain any express provisions
extending the law to extraterritorial activities.  Moreover,
although title III of the ADA applies to public accommodations
and commercial facilities whose operations "affect commerce" and
the statute defines commerce, in part, as "travel, trade,
traffic, commerce, transportation or communication . . . between
any foreign country or any territory or possession and any
"State", such broad language, found in many Acts, is not
generally  considered sufficient, by itself, to overcome the
presumption against extraterritoriality.  See E.E.O.C. v. Arabian
American Oil Co., supra, 59 U.S.L.W. at 4227; see also, sections
301(1), (2) and (7) of the ADA.  

     Furthermore, Congress, in passing the Civil Rights Act of
1991, amended sections 101(4) and 102 of the ADA, to broaden the
ADA to protect extraterritorial employment.  See sections 109(a)
and (b) of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-166, 105
Stat. 1071 (1991); E.E.O.C. v. Arabian American Oil Co., supra,
59 U.S.L.W. at 4229.  No comparable, explicit expression has been
made with respect to extraterritorial coverage of public
accommodations and commercial facilities under title III.

     While I am unable to provide a definitive response to your
question, I hope this information has been helpful to you.

                                   Sincerely,




                                  John L. Wodatch
                                      Chief
                               Public Access Section