Supreme Court Considers Jurisdiction for U.S. Victim Lawsuits Against Palestinian Authorities
The court evaluates the legality of American victims pursuing damages from the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization.
The U.S. Supreme Court engaged in oral arguments on April 1, 2025, regarding whether American victims of violence in Israel and the West Bank can initiate lawsuits for damages against the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in U.S. courts.
This significant case addresses the jurisdictional authority of U.S. federal courts over entities linked to the PA and PLO.
American citizens who have either suffered injuries or have lost relatives in attacks carried out in Israel and the West Bank have filed multiple lawsuits seeking reparations.
A notable case from 2015 resulted in a jury awarding $654 million to U.S. victims of incidents that occurred in the early 2000s; however, subsequent appeals courts dismissed these lawsuits on the basis of jurisdiction.
In 2019, Congress enacted the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, which aimed to enable the PLO and PA to be held accountable in U.S. courts if they were determined to have financially supported individuals responsible for attacks against Americans.
Lower courts have previously ruled that this legislation infringed upon the due process rights of the Palestinian authorities, creating a contentious legal environment.
During the recent proceedings, several justices on the Supreme Court, which currently holds a conservative majority, appeared to lean toward upholding the 2019 statute.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh highlighted that matters of national security and foreign policy are fundamentally within the purview of Congress and the executive branch.
Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler, representing the interests of the Trump administration, echoed this sentiment, arguing that the courts ought to defer to the legislative and executive branches in such matters.
Kneedler contended that the PA and PLO had the opportunity to avert legal consequences by ceasing alleged activities that led to these attacks, but chose not to do so.
Meanwhile, Mitchell Berger, representing the PA and PLO, argued that the assignment of jurisdiction goes beyond the legislative authority of Congress.
A ruling from the Supreme Court on this matter is anticipated before the conclusion of its current term in June 2025.
This significant case addresses the jurisdictional authority of U.S. federal courts over entities linked to the PA and PLO.
American citizens who have either suffered injuries or have lost relatives in attacks carried out in Israel and the West Bank have filed multiple lawsuits seeking reparations.
A notable case from 2015 resulted in a jury awarding $654 million to U.S. victims of incidents that occurred in the early 2000s; however, subsequent appeals courts dismissed these lawsuits on the basis of jurisdiction.
In 2019, Congress enacted the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, which aimed to enable the PLO and PA to be held accountable in U.S. courts if they were determined to have financially supported individuals responsible for attacks against Americans.
Lower courts have previously ruled that this legislation infringed upon the due process rights of the Palestinian authorities, creating a contentious legal environment.
During the recent proceedings, several justices on the Supreme Court, which currently holds a conservative majority, appeared to lean toward upholding the 2019 statute.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh highlighted that matters of national security and foreign policy are fundamentally within the purview of Congress and the executive branch.
Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler, representing the interests of the Trump administration, echoed this sentiment, arguing that the courts ought to defer to the legislative and executive branches in such matters.
Kneedler contended that the PA and PLO had the opportunity to avert legal consequences by ceasing alleged activities that led to these attacks, but chose not to do so.
Meanwhile, Mitchell Berger, representing the PA and PLO, argued that the assignment of jurisdiction goes beyond the legislative authority of Congress.
A ruling from the Supreme Court on this matter is anticipated before the conclusion of its current term in June 2025.
