logo
Editorial: Finally, the Supreme Court can help a California family get back art stolen by Nazis

Editorial: Finally, the Supreme Court can help a California family get back art stolen by Nazis

Yahoo23-02-2025

The magnificent Impressionist painting of a rainy Paris streetscape that hung on a wall in Lilly Cassirer's home in Germany in 1939 was the price she paid to a Nazi art dealer in exchange for exit papers from the country. It was nothing close to a fair transaction. She was a Jewish woman relinquishing valuable artwork in exchange for safe passage.
Eventually her descendants discovered that the Camille Pissarro painting that Cassirer had owned, 'Rue Saint-Honoré, Après-midi, Effet de Pluie,' was hanging on the wall of the Thyssen-Bornemisza National Museum in Madrid.
Cassirer's family has spent two decades in and out of courts unsuccessfully trying to get the painting that all agree was stolen from her by the Nazis. It's a travesty that this family is still fighting for the return of this painting.
Now they will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the legal saga. What makes this time different? A new California law, Assembly Bill 2867, which passed in August and was signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September. The new statute requires courts to use California law when hearing cases filed by California residents or their families to recover stolen art or other significant artifacts held by museums.
The Supreme Court is finally in a position to course-correct the lower courts on this matter, and it should do so.
Until that bill passed, when a California plaintiff sued a foreign entity such as the Spanish museum to recover stolen artwork, the court would decide whether to use the law of the state or the law of the defendant's country. California law holds that a thief never has a legal right to stolen property, and whoever gets the property later never has a legal right to it either. But under Spanish law, after a certain amount of time passes, the holder of stolen property is legally allowed to keep it.
A federal district court hearing the Cassirer case used Spanish law and ruled that the Spanish museum could keep the painting. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — twice — ruled that the lower court was correct in deciding that the Spanish museum could keep the painting.
The Cassirer family is arguing that based on the new California statute, the 9th Circuit's decision is now 'irreconcilable with current California law.' The family is asking the Supreme Court to throw out that decision and return the case to the 9th Circuit, which in turn should follow the new statute, overturn the lower court's decision and finally order the painting returned to the family.
We hope that's exactly what happens. That outcome would be not only fair but also in keeping with broader norms: The Legislature specifically wrote the new law "to align California law with federal laws, policies, and international agreements, which prohibit pillage and seizure of works of art and cultural property, and call for restitution of seized property."
In the past even some jurists were anguished over their decisions. Judge Consuelo Callahan on the 9th Circuit concurred with the decision upholding the museum's right to the painting even as she said that appellate judges sometimes must 'concur in a result at odds with our moral compass. For me, this is such a situation.'
U.S. District Judge John F. Walter, in his lower court ruling for the Spanish museum, lamented that he couldn't force the museum to 'comply with its moral commitments' as laid out in powerful but nonbinding international agreements (signed by dozens of countries, including Spain) that state there is a moral duty to return Nazi-looted art to its rightful owners or their heirs.
Now the California law opens the door for judges to make legal decisions that align with moral ones.
But the Spanish government, which owns the museum, doesn't have to wait for those decisions. It should do the right thing and return this painting to its rightful owners. That would be the swiftest way for long-awaited justice to be done.
If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Eric Adams signs executive order adopting Holocaust remembrance group's definition of antisemitism
Eric Adams signs executive order adopting Holocaust remembrance group's definition of antisemitism

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Eric Adams signs executive order adopting Holocaust remembrance group's definition of antisemitism

Mayor Eric Adams signed an executive order Sunday adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism, as he vowed to ramp up the city campaign to combat Jew hatred. He also introduced legislation urging the City Council to approve the IHRA definition, which would make it official law. The IHRA definition is considered by many Jewish leaders to be the standard in fighting antisemitism. 'Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities,' the IHRA definition states. Adams announced the order during a discussion with Dr. Phil Sunday night at the Tribeca Synagogue. It comes as he faces re-election and plans to run as an independent on an 'End Semitism' ballot line. 'Antisemitism is a vile disease that's been spreading across our nation and our city. What's worse, since Hamas' terror attacks on October 7, 2023, we have seen this hateful rhetoric become normalized on our campuses, in our communities, and online as antisemitic propaganda far too often masquerades as 'activism,'' Adams said. More than half of the hate crimes reported in the city in March victimized Jews, even though they account for just 11 percent of the population, the mayor noted. 'We know this moment demands bold, decisive action to crack down on anti-Jewish hatred,' Adams said. 'Today, we signed a landmark executive order to adopt an internationally recognized definition of antisemitism, but we must go further. I am calling on the City Council to join this commitment to target antisemitism everywhere it exists and immediately pass a bill to codify this definition into law. It's time we all come together to eradicate this hatred from our city, once and for all.' At the state level, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo — who's also running for mayor — issued an order barring state entities from doing business with firms that back the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel before his resignation. Gov. Kathy Hochul has retained the policy. State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli has his own pro-Israel policy. In 2021, he announced that he pulled $111 million in investments out of the firm that owns Ben & Jerry's because of the ice cream maker's boycott of Israel's occupied territories. DiNapoli is the sole manager of the $274 billion state Common Retirement Fund.

South Korea President Lee's election law violation hearing postponed indefinitely, court says
South Korea President Lee's election law violation hearing postponed indefinitely, court says

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

South Korea President Lee's election law violation hearing postponed indefinitely, court says

SEOUL (Reuters) -A Seoul court said on Monday it will indefinitely postpone a trial of President Lee Jae-myung on charges of violating election law in 2022. South Korea's Supreme Court ruled in May, before Lee was elected, that Lee had violated election law by publicly making "false statements" during his 2022 presidential bid, and sent the case back to an appeals court. The Seoul High Court, which had scheduled a hearing for the case on June 18, said on Monday that it will postpone the hearing "to be decided later" without a date, a court spokesperson confirmed. Lee's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The court said its decision to postpone the hearing was due to "Constitution Article 84", without elaborating. South Korea's Constitution, Article 84, says a sitting president is "not subject to criminal prosecution while in office" for most crimes. However, legal experts are divided on whether that applies to ongoing trials that were already prosecuted before a president was elected. The National Court Administration under the Supreme Court gave as its opinion that judges of each court where Lee's trials are being held will have to decide whether to stop or proceed, according to its statement to a lawmaker in May. "The court in charge of hearing the case will determine whether Article 84 of the Constitution should be applied to a criminal defendant who was elected in the presidential election," the statement said. Lee's ruling Democratic Party, which controls parliament, is planning to pass a bill this week which suspends ongoing trials for the incumbent president, local broadcaster KBS reported on Monday. The Constitutional Court may be asked to rule whether the bill is unconstitutional, legal experts have said.

Alexandre de Moraes: Brazilian judge in showdown with far-right
Alexandre de Moraes: Brazilian judge in showdown with far-right

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Alexandre de Moraes: Brazilian judge in showdown with far-right

With his steely gaze and bald pate, Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes has emerged as one of the most powerful and polarizing people in Brazil. In the 56-year-old judge's sights is far-right ex-president Jair Bolsonaro, accused of plotting to cling onto power despite his failed October 2022 re-election bid. A showdown with tech titan Elon Musk has meanwhile put Moraes in the crosshairs of US President Donald Trump's administration, which has hinted it could deny visas to foreign officials who threaten US nationals or residents over social media posts. Moraes shut down Musk's X network in Brazil, one of its largest markets, for 40 days for failing to tackle disinformation, mostly shared by supporters of Bolsonaro. Musk reacted with fury at the time, branding Moraes an "evil dictator cosplaying as a judge" and accusing him of "trying to destroy democracy in Brazil." Bolsonaro also has called Moraes a "dictator," while his son Eduardo, an MP, has lobbied for US sanctions against the "totalitarian" judge. Moraes ordered that the younger Bolsonaro be placed under investigation for alleged obstruction of justice. - Hero or villain? - Known by his nickname, "Xandao," Moraes looms large over a deeply divided Brazil. The immensely powerful judge, who previously headed the Superior Electoral Tribunal (TSE), is hated by the far right, which accuses him of censorship and abuse of office. To others, the muay thai aficionado is a hero on a mission to save Brazil's young democracy. There was little in Moraes's background to hint he would become a thorn in the side of conservatives. The constitutional law expert worked as a Sao Paulo state prosecutor, and went on to become state security secretary. Known as a hardliner, he drew criticism from left-wing activists, who accused him of repressing social movements. He served as justice minister under center-right ex-president Michel Temer, who named him to the Supreme Court in 2017. "He's a political animal," constitutional law expert Antonio Carlos de Freitas told AFP. Supreme Court insiders call him a pragmatist. But his pursuit of Bolsonaro and Musk's X showed a steelier side. Moraes has presided over a slew of cases targeting Bolsonaro, barring the so-called "Trump of the Tropics" from running for office until 2030 over his attempts to discredit the electoral system. But it is the coup investigation that threatens to definitively torpedo Bolsonaro's political comeback bid. The 70-year-old former army captain risks up to 40 years in prison if convicted of plotting to prevent leftist Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva from taking power. Prosecutors say the plot included a plan to arrest and even assassinate Lula, his vice president Geraldo Alckmin and Moraes. - 'Political animal' - Moraes was an omnipresent figure during the polarizing 2022 election campaign, aggressively using his rulings to fight election disinformation on social media. That included blocking the accounts of some prominent conservative figures, leading to his standoff with Musk, who has been accused of turning his social media platform into a megaphone for right-wing conspiracy theories. The married father of three gives few interviews, and rarely posted on his X account, where he had a million followers, before closing it in February. "Freedom of expression doesn't mean freedom of aggression," he has said. "It doesn't mean the freedom to defend tyranny." Still two decades away from the mandatory retirement age for judges in Brazil of 75, Moraes has been cited as a possible future candidate for president. He has never discussed any such ambitions publicly. msi-rsr/jhb/cb/sla/sst

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store