To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
On February 21, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran that U.S. victims of a foreign terrorist attack could not rely on a provision of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) to collect damages from Iran by seizing Iranian antiquities held by the University of Chicago. The case concerns a $71.5 million default judgment against Iran to victims and relatives of victims of a 1997 suicide bombing by Hamas in Jerusalem for the state’s role in supporting Hamas. Plaintiffs brought suit under §1605A of the FSIA, an exception to general immunity regarding terrorism claims that applies to foreign states designated as state sponsors of terrorism. They argued they should be able to collect their award by seizing the antiquities under §1610, which lists exceptions to the default that property in the United States belonging to foreign states is immune from attachment arrest and execution, and specifically through §1610(g), which lists circumstances that allow for the attachment of property for plaintiffs recovering from a judgment under § 1605A.The Court rejected this argument, stating that §1610(g) was enacted to overcome the normal presumption that a judgment against a foreign state cannot be enforced against the state’s agencies and instrumentalities and holding that it “does not provide a freestanding basis for parties holding a judgment under §1605A to attach and execute against the property of a foreign state; rather, for §1610(g) to apply, the immunity of the property at issue must be rescinded under a separate provision within §1610.”