Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Aramco: The Court’s Former Title VII Extraterritorial Rule Was Superseded by Congress

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published August 15, 2026

EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co. involved a naturalized United States citizen employed in Saudi Arabia who alleged race, religion, and national-origin discrimination by an American employer.

The alleged discrimination occurred outside the United States

Boureslan worked in Saudi Arabia and sued under Title VII after discharge. The lower courts held the statute did not reach that overseas employment.

The Court applied the presumption against extraterritoriality

Broad definitions of commerce did not clearly state that Congress intended Title VII to regulate employment abroad. The 1991 majority therefore affirmed dismissal under the statute as it then stood.

Congress promptly changed the governing rule

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 extended specified federal employment protections to United States citizens employed abroad by American employers and foreign entities controlled by them, subject to statutory defenses and exceptions.

The current statute, not Aramco’s bottom line, controls

Aramco remains relevant to clear-statement methodology. Overseas employment advice must start with amended Title VII, employer-control factors, citizenship, foreign-law defenses, and the precise work location.

Key takeaways

• Confirm the employee’s citizenship and primary work location.
• Determine whether the employer is American or American-controlled.
• Analyze the foreign-law defense and statutory exclusions.
• Do not cite Aramco’s superseded outcome as current Title VII coverage law.