A legal battle has resurfaced at the U.S. Supreme Court involving the rights of Holocaust survivors to seek compensation from Hungary for property seized during World War II. The case, rooted in events that transpired during the Hungarian government’s collaboration with Nazi Germany, poses significant questions about sovereign immunity and the exceptions outlined in U.S. law. Specifically, the court is considering the applicability of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) and its “expropriation” exception. This exception allows lawsuits against foreign countries in instances where property was taken in violation of international law if specific conditions are met, such as the property being involved in commercial activity in the United States.
Survivors and their descendants have pursued legal action since 2010, charging both Hungary and its national railway, MÁV, with confiscating assets from Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust. According to the report by SCOTUSblog, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit previously permitted the case to move forward, interpreting the expropriation exception to cover scenarios in which expropriated property is “commingled” with other funds used for U.S. commercial activities.
During the oral arguments, Hungary’s lawyer, Joshua Glasgow, and Sopan Joshi, representing the federal government, contended that the D.C. Circuit’s interpretation was inconsistent with the FSIA. They argued for a more stringent standard that requires distinct identification of the property exchanged. Meanwhile, justices expressed concerns about the implications of both interpretations—either potentially providing foreign governments with a means to evade liability or risking disturbances to international relations.
As the justices deliberate, discussions underscore the intricate balance between redress for historical wrongs and adherence to established norms of international legal immunity. The decision could have far-reaching effects not only on this particular case but also on the broader interpretation of the FSIA in cases involving historical injustices.