ALERT: Supreme Court Delivers Significant 9-0 Decision

OPINION:  This article contains commentary which may reflect the author’s opinion

The effects of the Nazi regime in Germany during World War II have been far and long reaching.

Nazis fleeing Germany to other countries around the world toward the end of the war caused international cases for years.

And, cases are still being decided today regarding valuables that disappeared from Germany during the war and have been periodically discovered in other places around the world since.

International rulings in these matters are not a new thing.

For instance, a federal judge in Washington ruled against Germany in 2017.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit narrowed the case the following year, saying claims could proceed against the foundation but not against Germany’s government itself.

Now there is a case that has found itself in the highest court in the United States, due to a law that is involved with claims against foreign governments.

The case concerns a collection of ecclesiastical relics known as the Welfenschatz that Jewish art dealers sold.

The collection, dating primarily from the 11th to 15th centuries, includes gilded crosses and busts of saints. Pieces from the collection are on display at a museum in Berlin.

The heirs sued Germany and the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, which oversees museums in Berlin, in 2015 in a U.S. federal court, seeking the collection’s return of $250 million.

The case lies in the shadow of the events in Germany during World War II.

The plaintiffs said the 1935 sale was a vastly undervalued “sham transaction” made under duress by Jewish victims of Nazi persecution in the years before World War Two.

“The choice they faced was clear,” the lawsuit said, “their property or their lives.”

When the case arrive at the Supreme Court, the court threw out a lower court’s decision that had let the lawsuit move forward in federal court in Washington.

The justices also threw out a separate lower court ruling that had allowed a similar lawsuit to proceed against Hungary that sought restitution for Jewish people whose property was forcibly taken as part of that nation’s collaboration with its Nazi allies during World War Two.

And the Supreme Court of the United States did arrive at a verdict.

The U.S. Supreme Court has now delivered a setback to a bid by the heirs of Jewish art dealers to win restitution from Germany in American courts for what they called a coerced sale forced by the former Nazi government in 1935 of a collection of medieval religious art.

In a 9-0 ruling, the justices decided that the lawsuit could not proceed under a U.S. law called the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act that limits the jurisdiction of American courts in claims against foreign governments.

“An American court has thrown out a lawsuit against a German museum foundation over a medieval treasure trove that was filed by heirs of Nazi-era Jewish art dealers, saying that the US lacked jurisdiction to hear such a lawsuit,” The Guardian reported.

“The foundation that oversees Berlin’s museums said in a statement on Tuesday that the US district court for the District of Columbia last week granted the foundation’s motion to dismiss the 2015 restitution lawsuit that was brought against it, bringing the case to an end in the US, absent an appeal by the plaintiff. The Welfenschatz, or Guelph Treasure, was at the center of a long-running ownership dispute, includes silver and gold crucifixes, altars, intricate silverwork, and other relics,” the outlet added.

The ruling rejected the argument by the heirs that Germany was not immune from their lawsuit under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act because the coerced sale was an act of genocide, in violation of international law.

Writing for the court, Chief Justice John Roberts said that law does not cover what a foreign country does to property belonging to its own citizens within its own borders.

“As a nation, we would be surprised – and might even initiate reciprocal action – if a court in Germany adjudicated claims by Americans that they were entitled to hundreds of millions of dollars because of human rights violations committed by the United States government years ago,” Roberts wrote.

“There is no reason to anticipate that Germany’s reaction would be any different were American courts to exercise the jurisdiction claimed in this case,” Roberts added.

But while the justices decided that this law barred the claims that the heirs brought against a German agency that administers state museums, they directed lower courts to re-examine other arguments made in the case, meaning the lawsuit potentially could still proceed.

Meanwhile, in Germany, the case has also reached a conclusion.

The Prussian foundation’s own investigation found that the sale was a “voluntary, fair-market transaction,” and a German commission that looked into Nazi-looted art agreed that it was not made under duress. The price reflected the Great Depression’s effect on the art market, Conservative Brief reports.

COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

 

 

 

 

 

Send this to a friend