Your argument next in case 24-699 ExxonMobil Corporation versus Corrassion C-Mex at all.

Mr. Ratner, Ms. Ratner.

Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, if you read the Helms-Burtan Act from front to back,

you'll have one clear takeaway, and it's the one already mentioned this morning, that the 1996 Congress wanted to put

crushing diplomatic and economic pressure on the Cuban government. That includes by abrogating

the sovereign immunity of Cuban instrumentalities in claims brought under Title III of that act.

Now, there's admittedly a high bar for abrogation, but this Court has said again and again that Congress doesn't need to use magic words to get there.

It just needs to make its intent clear through what Kurtz called

the sum total of its work. And it did that here. Let me start with the most important piece,

Section 6082A. Congress created a cause of action and expressly applied that cause of action

to foreign instrumentalities.

That's a standard route to abrogation that this Court has recognized in Kurtz, Kimmel,

Hibbs, and Financial Oversight and Management Board. Then Congress did three things to confirm that

that was its intent.

First, we know with absolute certainty that it wanted claims and judgments against Cuban instrumentalities because it repeatedly discusses them, including at 6082A7, C2, and D.

That was up for debate in Kimmel and Kurtz.

It's not up for debate here.

Second, Congress emphasized that it wanted fully effective remedies in U.S. courts, including against governments.

That's 60818 and 11.

And third, at the same time it authorized suits against Cuban instrumentalities,

Congress also codified an incredibly restrictive embargo

cutting off commerce between the United States and Cuba.

...