Terrorism Litigation

Domestic Litigation and Compensation to Ukrainian Victims of Russian Aggression

Many proposals to compensate Ukrainian victims of Russian aggression do not directly involve domestic courts, in part because foreign sovereign immunity poses significant obstacles to such litigation. There are, however, important cases against Russia currently pending in Ukrainian courts. These cases were the subject of a recent session held in Lviv, Ukraine, as part of…

Continue Reading

Material Support of Terrorism Looms over Supreme Court’s Social Media Case

On February 22, 2023, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Twitter v. Taamneh. The case concerns an act of violence committed by ISIS in a Turkish nightclub in 2017. In bringing suit in the lower courts, plaintiffs alleged that Twitter, Facebook, and Google aided and abetted ISIS’s attack, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §…

Continue Reading

Transnational Litigation Anticipation: Previewing the Court’s Next Term

TLB recently recapped the Supreme Court’s transnational litigation cases from last Term. This post looks ahead to the upcoming Term, for which the Court has already granted certiorari in a personal jurisdiction case that may have implications for transnational litigation. TLB is also tracking several interesting petitions for certiorari in disputes involving the Foreign Sovereign…

Continue Reading

How Congress Should Designate Russia a State Sponsor of Terrorism

Cross Posted at Just Security Appearing before the United Nations General Assembly late last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy renewed his call for the designation of Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism.  Proponents of the designation argue that it would ratchet up sanctions–making it more difficult for Russia to continue the war against Ukraine–and…

Continue Reading

Russia Should Not be Designated a State Sponsor of Terrorism

Editor’s Note: This article also appears in Just Security.

Members of Congress and President Zelenskyy of Ukraine have called for U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken to designate Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, and late last month the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported out a resolution to this effect. The designation would have important…

Continue Reading

When Terrorists Default, Should Courts Consider Personal Jurisdiction?

A case from last week, Kaplan v. Hezbollah, illustrates the intricacies of consent-based personal jurisdiction in the context of default judgments and raises questions about the due process rights of terrorist organizations (and other unpopular defendants). U.S. citizens injured by Hezbollah missile attacks in Israel sued under the Antiterrorism Act (ATA). Hezbollah did not enter…

Continue Reading

Section 230 and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality

The Ninth Circuit opinion in Gonzalez v. Google (2021) raises important questions about how the presumption against extraterritoriality applies to immunity defenses invoked by social media companies under 47 U.S.C. § 230.Section 230 shields internet companies from civil liability for user-generated content hosted on their platforms. Gonzalezholds, effectively, that there is no conceivable application of…

Continue Reading

Afghan Central Bank Assets Should Be Immune in Cases against the Taliban

Victims of terrorist attacks who obtained default judgments against the Taliban have requested the turnover of Afghan central bank assets frozen by U.S. sanctions. Because these assets are protected by foreign sovereign immunity and because no exception to immunity is applicable, courts should not order the assets turned over to the judgement-creditor plaintiffs, despite the terrible injuries that they and their families have suffered.

Continue Reading

S.D.N.Y. Holds Consent-Based Personal Jurisdiction over the PLO Unconstitutional

Palestinian flag

The Southern District of New York recently held in Fuld v. Palestine Liberation Organization that a federal statute subjecting the Palestine Liberation Organization (“PLO”) to personal jurisdiction violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The case adds to a growing list of important due process questions in transnational litigation.

Continue Reading

Ingrid (Wuerth) Brunk

Vanderbilt Law School
ingrid.wuerth@vanderbilt.eduEmail

William Dodge

UC Davis School of Law
wsdodge@ucdavis.eduEmail

Maggie Gardner

Cornell Law School
mgardner@cornell.eduEmail

John F. Coyle

University of North Carolina School of Law
jfcoyle@email.unc.eduEmail

Zachary D. Clopton

Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
zclopton@law.northwestern.eduEmail

Aaron D. Simowitz

Willamette University College of Law
Bio | Posts

Timothy D. Lytton

Georgia State University College of Law
Bio | Posts

Chukwuma Okoli

University of Birmingham
Bio | Posts

Abubakri Yekini

University of Manchester
Bio | Posts

Haley Anderson

University of California Berkeley
Bio | Posts

Brian D. Hulse

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Bio | Posts

Wenliang Zhang

Renmin University of China Law School
Bio | Posts

Haoxiang Ruan

Renmin University of China Law School
Bio | Posts

Melissa Kucinski

MKFL
Bio | Posts