Victims of Hamas sue UNRWA
Victims of the October 7, 2023, attacks by Hamas have sued UNRWA USA, a Delaware non-profit that provides aid for Palestinians in Gaza. The case is one of several involving the war in Gaza, including one filed by residents of Gaza against the Biden administration and one brought by victims of Hamas against the National…
Continue ReadingChiquita Liable for Financing Colombian Paramilitary Death Squads
In a win for international human rights advocacy, a Florida jury has found a U.S. corporation liable for human rights violations committed in a foreign country. This first of three “bellwether” trials involved nine cases. Hundreds remain to be tried in this multidistrict litigation. The jury’s verdict is the latest development in a civil case…
Continue ReadingVictims of Hamas Bring Suit Related to Campus Protests
Victims of the October 7, 2023, attacks by Hamas have sued two U.S. organizations for violating of Anti-Terrorism Act and the Alien Tort Statute. The nine plaintiffs – U.S. and Israeli citizens – allege that defendants serve as a “propaganda machine,” one that intimidates and recruits “impressionable college students to serve as foot soldiers for…
Continue ReadingPersonal Jurisdiction and Extraterritoriality
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly said that Congress has constitutional authority to regulate extraterritorially. “Both parties concede, as they must,” Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote in EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co. (1991), “that Congress has the authority to enforce its laws beyond the territorial boundaries of the United States.” The presumption against extraterritoriality, which…
Continue ReadingAre Social Media Algorithms “Passive Nonfeasance”? What Twitter v. Taamneh Got Wrong
In the recent case of Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that Facebook, Twitter, and Google knowingly provided assistance to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) in connection with its attack on the Reina nightclub in Istanbul, Turkey in 2017. The plaintiffs, family…
Continue ReadingFuld: Right for the Wrong Reason
In a major decision interpreting Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (2023), the Second Circuit in Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization held that personal jurisdiction may not be established by relying on the “deemed consent” provision of the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (“PSJVTA”). A thorough review of the decision can…
Continue ReadingSecond Circuit Rejects Consent-Based Jurisdiction over PLO
Last Friday, the Second Circuit issued much-anticipated decisions in Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization and Waldman v. Palestine Liberation Organization, cases brought by U.S. nationals against the Palestine Liberation Organization (“PLO”) and Palestinian Authority (“PA”) for injuries sustained during terrorist attacks in Israel. After the Second Circuit held in an earlier decision in Waldman that…
Continue ReadingSupreme Court Roundup (October Term 2022)
During its 2022 Term, which ended four weeks ago, the Supreme Court decided five cases with important implications for transnational litigation. The questions included whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) applies to criminal proceedings; the standard for aiding and abetting under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA); whether states may exercise general personal jurisdiction over foreign…
Continue ReadingSupreme Court Finds Tech Companies Not Liable for Terrorism
Last week, the Supreme Court decided two cases in which plaintiffs alleged that social media companies aided and abetted international terrorism. In the first case, Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, the Justices unanimous interpreted the Antiterrorism Act’s (ATA) provision on aiding and abetting to require conscious and culpable participation. Plaintiffs’ allegations that ISIS used defendants’ social…
Continue ReadingSupreme Court Likely to Shield Internet Platforms from Liability for Terrorist Acts
On February 21 and 22, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two companion cases regarding the liability of internet platforms for terrorists’ use of their services. Gonzalez v. Google concerns the scope of immunity for internet companies under 47 U.S.C § 230, specifically whether that statutory grant of immunity covers a platform’s automated suggestions…
Continue Reading