Plain-English summary
Court: FSIA expropriation exception excludes a state’s taking of its own citizens’ property
The Supreme Court unanimously held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s expropriation exception does not provide U.S. courts jurisdiction over claims that a foreign government took property from its own nationals in violation of international law. The Court read the exception to incorporate the longstanding international-law rule that a state’s taking of its own citizens’ property is not an international-law wrong.
Why this matters
This decision narrows the circumstances in which foreign governments can be sued in U.S. courts for alleged takings. It limits the reach of a key FSIA exception by adopting the conventional international-law rule that domestic takings of a country's own citizens do not constitute international wrongs, affecting claims related to historical seizures such as wartime looting and confiscations by foreign states.
Who may feel it
- Individuals and families seeking to recover property taken by foreign governments (including Holocaust-era property)
- Foreign sovereigns sued in U.S. courts for alleged takings
- U.S. courts and litigants in international takings and art-recovery cases
- Museums, collectors, and intermediaries involved in disputed cultural property
Key questions
- Does the FSIA expropriation exception waive sovereign immunity for property taken by a foreign government from its own nationals in violation of international law?