Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 583 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case brought against the nation of Iran by the families of American victims of the Ben Yehuda Street bombings which occurred in September 1997.[1] Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, nations cannot typically be sued unless the state can be proved to have provided support for terrorists or acts of terrorism.[2] After a district judge ruled Iran owed $71.5 million to the families of the victims, the families brought several cases to court in an attempt to attach and execute on assets owned by the state of Iran located in the United States.
Section 1610(g) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act does not provide a freestanding basis for parties holding a judgment under § 1605A to attach and execute against the property of a foreign state; rather, for § 1610(g) to apply, the immunity of the property at issue must be rescinded under a separate provision within § 1610. Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Under subsections (a) and (g) of 28 U.S.C. § 1610, attachment and execution on the property of a foreign state is permissible provided that it is being used for "a commercial activity in the United States".[3] However, the items in question in this particular case—ancient Persian artifacts held by the University of ChicagoOriental Institute and the Field Museum (both of whom were sued by Rubin et al.) were not in use by the state of Iran, and therefore could not be executed upon, as ruled by both the district court and Seventh Circuit. An 8-0 (Kagan did not participate) opinion was delivered by Justice Sotomayor upholding the judgment that the ancient artifacts cannot be seized, ruling that exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act did not apply in this case.
The United States filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Iran, writing: "The property at issue here consists of ancient Persian artifacts, documenting a unique aspect of Iran's cultural heritage, that were lent to a U.S. institution in the 1930s for academic study....Execution against such unique cultural artifacts could cause affront and reciprocity problems."[4][5]
^Liptak, Adam (February 21, 2018). "Supreme Court Rules on Terrorism, Whistle-Blowers and Prisoners". The New York Times. Retrieved April 6, 2018.
^"BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS" (PDF).
External linksedit
Text of Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 583 U.S. ___ (2018) is available from:JustiaOyez (oral argument audio)Supreme Court (slip opinion)
December 15, 2023
rubin, islamic, republic, iran, 2018, united, states, supreme, court, case, brought, against, nation, iran, families, american, victims, yehuda, street, bombings, which, occurred, september, 1997, under, foreign, sovereign, immunities, 1976, nations, cannot, t. Rubin v Islamic Republic of Iran 583 U S 2018 was a United States Supreme Court case brought against the nation of Iran by the families of American victims of the Ben Yehuda Street bombings which occurred in September 1997 1 Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 nations cannot typically be sued unless the state can be proved to have provided support for terrorists or acts of terrorism 2 After a district judge ruled Iran owed 71 5 million to the families of the victims the families brought several cases to court in an attempt to attach and execute on assets owned by the state of Iran located in the United States Rubin v Islamic Republic of IranSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued December 4 2017Decided February 21 2018Full case nameJenny Rubin et al v Islamic Republic of Iran et al Docket no 16 534Citations583 U S more 138 S Ct 816 200 L Ed 2d 58Case historyPrior830 F 3d 470 7th Cir 2016 cert granted 137 S Ct 2326 2017 HoldingSection 1610 g of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act does not provide a freestanding basis for parties holding a judgment under 1605A to attach and execute against the property of a foreign state rather for 1610 g to apply the immunity of the property at issue must be rescinded under a separate provision within 1610 Seventh Circuit affirmed Court membershipChief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Anthony Kennedy Clarence ThomasRuth Bader Ginsburg Stephen BreyerSamuel Alito Sonia SotomayorElena Kagan Neil GorsuchCase opinionMajoritySotomayor joined by Roberts Kennedy Thomas Ginsburg Breyer Alito GorsuchKagan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case Laws applied28 U S C 1604 et seq Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act Under subsections a and g of 28 U S C 1610 attachment and execution on the property of a foreign state is permissible provided that it is being used for a commercial activity in the United States 3 However the items in question in this particular case ancient Persian artifacts held by the University of Chicago Oriental Institute and the Field Museum both of whom were sued by Rubin et al were not in use by the state of Iran and therefore could not be executed upon as ruled by both the district court and Seventh Circuit An 8 0 Kagan did not participate opinion was delivered by Justice Sotomayor upholding the judgment that the ancient artifacts cannot be seized ruling that exceptions to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act did not apply in this case The United States filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Iran writing The property at issue here consists of ancient Persian artifacts documenting a unique aspect of Iran s cultural heritage that were lent to a U S institution in the 1930s for academic study Execution against such unique cultural artifacts could cause affront and reciprocity problems 4 5 See also editLists of United States Supreme Court cases Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Roberts CourtReferences edit Rubin v Islamic Republic of Iran April 5 2018 Retrieved April 5 2018 Rubin v Islamic Republic of Iran Harvard Law Review December 9 2016 Retrieved April 5 2018 28 U S C 1610 Liptak Adam February 21 2018 Supreme Court Rules on Terrorism Whistle Blowers and Prisoners The New York Times Retrieved April 6 2018 BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS PDF External links editText of Rubin v Islamic Republic of Iran 583 U S 2018 is available from Justia Oyez oral argument audio Supreme Court slip opinion Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Rubin v Islamic Republic of Iran amp oldid 1175149314, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
