What is Title III of the Helms-Burton Act and what does it allow?

Title III of the Helms-Burton Act (1996) allows US nationals to file lawsuits in American courts against any entity that 'traffics' in property confiscated by the Cuban government after the 1959 revolution. It was long kept dormant by Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama to avoid diplomatic conflicts with allies like Canada and Spain. Donald Trump activated it in 2019.

What Cuba cases is the Supreme Court hearing today?

The Supreme Court is considering two cases: 1) ExxonMobil vs. CIMEX, in which the oil major seeks over $1 billion from a Cuban state-owned company for oil and gas assets confiscated in 1960. 2) A small dock-building firm vs. Carnival, Royal Caribbean, Norwegian Cruise Line, and MSC Cruises, for using Havana port facilities that were confiscated before the revolution.

Is this the first time the Supreme Court has interpreted Helms-Burton Title III?

Yes. Although Title III was created in 1996, successive presidents kept it suspended for decades. Only after Trump lifted the suspension in 2019 did a wave of roughly 40 lawsuits begin working through the courts. Today marks the first time the nation's highest court will define the real scope and limits of this law.

How much money is at stake in Helms-Burton lawsuits?

The amounts are enormous. ExxonMobil alone is seeking over $1 billion. After Cuba's 1959 revolution, the communist government nationalized US-owned properties — factories, sugar mills, oil refineries, power plants — worth billions in today's dollars. Dozens of pending lawsuits could be shaped by the Supreme Court's ruling.

US Supreme Court Weighs Cuba Property Claims Worth Billions

The United States Supreme Court took a historic step Monday in the long and fraught relationship between Washington and Havana. On February 22, 2026, the justices heard oral arguments for the first time ever on the scope of Title III of the Helms-Burton Act — a provision that has sat at the center of US-Cuba legal disputes for three decades but that no Supreme Court has ever interpreted.

At stake: billions of dollars in claims for properties confiscated after the revolution that brought Fidel Castro to power in 1959.

Two Cases at the Heart of the Debate

The justices are examining two separate but legally related cases:

Case 1: ExxonMobil vs. CIMEX The US oil giant is seeking more than $1 billion in compensation from CIMEX, a Cuban state-owned enterprise, for oil and gas assets confiscated by the revolutionary government in 1960. ExxonMobil filed its suit in Washington in 2019, after Trump lifted the Title III suspension. The central legal question: can Cuban state-owned companies invoke the doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity to avoid US courts?

Case 2: Havana Dock Company vs. Four Cruise Lines A small firm that built docks in Havana’s harbor before the revolution is suing Carnival, Royal Caribbean, Norwegian Cruise Line, and MSC Cruises for using those confiscated port facilities. The question: are private companies liable simply for using stolen property?

A 30-Year Law — Never Before Interpreted

Title III was included in the Helms-Burton Act of 1996, which codified the US trade embargo against Cuba that Kennedy had imposed by executive order in the 1960s. The provision allows US nationals to sue in federal courts any entity that “traffics” in property confiscated by Cuba’s government.

But Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama kept Title III suspended year after year, fearing diplomatic fallout with European and Canadian allies invested in Cuba. It was Donald Trump who permanently activated it in 2019, with the State Department saying the move would “ratchet up pressure on the Cuban government.”

Since then, roughly 40 lawsuits have been working their way through the courts. Today, for the first time, the Supreme Court sets the definitive legal framework.

Cuba’s Defense: Sovereign Immunity

CIMEX and its lawyers argue that a 2024 lower court ruling — which allowed Cuban state-owned enterprises to claim foreign sovereign immunity — should be upheld. Under that doctrine, foreign governments and their agencies are generally shielded from being sued in US courts.

ExxonMobil rejects that reasoning. In court filings, its lawyers argued that the 2024 decision “imposes yet another in a long line of barriers to recovery for victims of the Castro government’s illegal confiscations.”

Context: Cuba Under Maximum Pressure

The hearing arrives as Cuba faces unprecedented pressure. The Trump administration has declared the island an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to US national security, cutting off Venezuelan oil and threatening tariffs on any country supplying Cuba with fuel.

As Mike Hammer, the top US diplomat in Havana, confirmed this very morning, change in Cuba “is approaching.” Against that backdrop, the Supreme Court is today laying the legal groundwork for what happens to confiscated property when that change arrives.

The blockade is already devastating: Cuba’s healthcare system is on the brink of collapse, fuel reserves are below 20 days, and Russia is attempting to covertly supply fuel via tanker. Cuba appealed to the UN against the full blockade, and the Trump administration has confirmed it is negotiating directly with elements of the Cuban regime.

What the Supreme Court Decides — and When

Oral arguments are today. The ruling could take months — Supreme Court decisions are typically issued before the term ends in June. But whatever the justices decide, it will set a precedent affecting dozens of active lawsuits and potentially billions in claims for properties Cuba’s communist government nationalized more than six decades ago.

For Cuban Americans who lost their heritage in that revolution, and for multinational companies operating on the island, this Monday is a date that will not easily be forgotten.

Image: United States Supreme Court building, Washington D.C. Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA).

Sources: Reuters · CNBC · US News & World Report