Courts & Litigation Foreign Relations & International Law

Document: Supreme Court Decision in Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran

William Ford
Wednesday, February 21, 2018, 5:21 PM

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled 8-0 in Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran that Section 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not provide a freestanding basis for allowing parties that hold terrorism-related judgments under Section 1605(a) of the FSIA to attach and execute the property of foreign states that would otherwise be subject to sovereign immunity protections.

Meet The Authors

Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
Brookings

Subscribe to Lawfare

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled 8-0 in Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran that Section 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not provide a freestanding basis for allowing parties that hold terrorism-related judgments under Section 1605(a) of the FSIA to attach and execute the property of foreign states that would otherwise be subject to sovereign immunity protections. Consequently, American victims of a 1997 terrorist attack in Jerusalem who secured judgments against the Islamic Republic of Iran under Section 1605(a) cannot enforce those judgments by attaching Iranian antiquities currently being held by the University of Chicago.

Topics:
Courts & Litigation Foreign Relations & International Law
Back to Top
William Ford

William Ford

Read More
William Ford is an impact associate at Protect Democracy. He previously was an appellate litigation fellow in the New York Attorney General's Office and a research intern at Lawfare. He holds a bachelor's degree with honors from the College of the Holy Cross.

Subscribe to Lawfare