Supreme Court revives lawsuits against Palestinian authorities from US victims of terrorism attacks
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Friday revived long-running lawsuits against Palestinian authorities from Americans who were killed or wounded in terrorism attacks in the Middle East.
The justices upheld a 2019 law enacted by Congress specifically to allow the victims' lawsuits to go forward against the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority.
The attacks occurred in the early 2000s, killing 33 people and wounding hundreds more, and in 2018, when a U.S.-born settler was stabbed to death by a Palestinian assailant outside a mall in the West Bank.
The victims and their families assert that Palestinian agents either were involved in the attacks or incited them.
The Palestinians have consistently argued that the cases shouldn't be allowed in American courts.
The federal appeals court in New York has repeatedly ruled in favor of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority, despite Congress' efforts to allow the victims' lawsuits to be heard.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals first ruled in 2016 against the victims of the attacks from 20 years ago, tossing out a $654 million jury verdict in their favor. In that earlier ruling, the appeals court held U.S. courts can't consider lawsuits against foreign-based groups over random attacks that were not aimed at the United States.
The victims had sued under the Anti-Terrorism Act, signed into law in 1992. The law was passed to open U.S. courts to victims of international terrorism, spurred by the killing of American Leon Klinghoffer during a 1985 terrorist attack aboard the Achille Lauro cruise ship.
The jury found the PLO and the Palestinian Authority liable for six attacks and awarded $218 million in damages. The award was automatically tripled under the law.
After the Supreme Court rejected the victims' appeal in 2018, Congress again amended the law to make clear it did not want to close the courthouse door to the victims.
___
Follow the AP's coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
21 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Displaced Syrians who have returned home face a fragile future, says UN refugees chief
DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) — U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi said Friday that more than two million Syrian refugees and internally displaced people have returned home since the fall of the government of Bashar Assad in December. Speaking during a visit to Damascus that coincided with World Refugee Day, Grandi described the situation in Syria as 'fragile and hopeful' and warned that the returnees may not remain if Syria does not get more international assistance to rebuild its war-battered infrastructure.
Toronto Star
31 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Europeans' meeting with top Iranian diplomat yields hope of more talks, no obvious breakthrough
GENEVA (AP) — A meeting between Iran's foreign minister and top European diplomats on Friday yielded hopes of further talks but no indication of any immediate concrete breakthrough, a week after the crisis centered on the Iranian nuclear program erupted into war between Israel and Tehran. Foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief, emerged from talks at a Geneva hotel about 3 1/2 hours after Iran's Abbas Araghchi arrived for the meeting.
Winnipeg Free Press
40 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
California argues in court against Trump's National Guard deployment
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California's challenge of the Trump administration's military deployment on the streets of Los Angeles returned to a federal courtroom in San Francisco on Friday after an appeals court handed President Donald Trump a key procedural win in the case. The hearing comes a day after the 9th Circuit appellate panel allowed the president to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed in response to protests over immigration raids. The appellate decision halted a temporary restraining order from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Despite the appellate setback, California's attorneys are expected to ask Breyer on Friday for a preliminary injunction returning control of the troops in Los Angeles, where protests have calmed down in recent days, to Newsom. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops have been necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said their presence on the streets of a U.S. city inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The demonstrations have appeared to be winding down, although dozens of protesters showed up Thursday at Dodger Stadium, where a group of federal agents in SUVs and cargo vans had gathered with their faces covered a parking lot. The Los Angeles Dodgers organization asked them to leave, and they did. On Tuesday, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew in downtown Los Angeles that was first imposed in response to vandalism and clashes with police after crowds gathered in opposition to agents taking migrants into detention. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said allows presidents to control state National Guard troops only during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, a Watergate prosecutor who was appointed by President Bill Clinton and is the brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration argued that courts can't second-guess the president's decisions. The appellate panel ruled otherwise, saying presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, but said that by citing violent acts by protesters in this case, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for federalizing the troops. For now, the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit proceeds. It's the first deployment by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since troops were sent to protect Civil Rights Movement marchers in 1965. Trump celebrated the appellate ruling in a social media post, calling it a 'BIG WIN' and hinting at more potential deployments. 'All over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done,' Trump wrote. Newsom, for his part, has also warned that California won't be the last state to see troops in the streets if Trump gets his way. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens,' Newsom said. Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance was traveling to Los Angeles on Friday to meet with U.S. Marines who also have been deployed to protect federal buildings, his office announced.
