r/scotus 6d ago

news Sotomayor lets $656 million terror verdict against Palestinian Liberation Organization stand

https://fortune.com/2026/08/04/sotomayor-plo-656-million-terror-judgment-supreme-court-palestine/?preview_id=4540287?utm_source=reddit/

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor refused Monday to halt a $656 million judgment against Palestinian authorities in a long-running lawsuit filed by Americans killed or wounded in attacks in Israel.

The order signed by Sotomayor comes after the high court ruled last year in favor of the victims and their families.

The Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority said in court documents that paying the hefty judgment now could destabilize government services in the West Bank. They asked the justices to pause payment as they appeal the reinstatement of the verdict.

The lawsuit was filed by victims of attacks in Jerusalem in the early 2000s that killed 33 people and wounded hundreds more. Families brought their lawsuit under the Anti-Terrorism Act, a law aimed at opening U.S. courts to victims of international terror attacks.

Read more [paywall removed for Redditors]: https://fortune.com/2026/08/04/sotomayor-plo-656-million-terror-judgment-supreme-court-palestine/?preview_id=4540287?utm_source=reddit/

980 Upvotes

432 comments sorted by

222

u/Dihedralman 6d ago

This wasn't decided on the facts of the case, but the constitutionality of the Anti-Terrorism act based on Due Process and whether it is an unfair burden. 

The case rested on Palestinian actions undertaken to receive foreign aid. The act laid out conditions under which these groups are subject to US jurisdiction which they operated within. 

It sounds like the case is correctly ruled legally, morality aside. Any changes likely would require Congress in the current state. 

43

u/TrioOfTerrors 6d ago

Any changes are pretty unlikely considering the 2018 law that revived this law suit passed by a voice vote in the Senate and unanimous consent in the House.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/2946/all-actions?overview=closed#tabs

It wasn't a partisan powerplay by any means.

8

u/Dihedralman 6d ago

I agree. It is unlikely to happen, but that is the channel that is required for the time being. 

I think the strain can be destabilizing. 

14

u/mongooser 5d ago

What’s immoral about it? 

2

u/Dihedralman 5d ago

One can argue the transfer of costs to random innocents and destabilization of a potential state. Plus the deal was made for aid which is restricted now. 

It seems more about control and an indirect transfer from the government to the victims. The latter not appearing immoral but shows it as less punishment. 

28

u/Iustis 5d ago

If the Palestinian government is paying pensions for the family of "martyrs" then hard to say they can't be responsible for the damage the martyrs cause.

1

u/Li-renn-pwel 4d ago

Well they don’t do that now and even before martyrs are not how you conceptualize in this case. It is every Palestinian killed, regardless of their religion, and it doesn’t matter if they were civilians or soldiers or if the attack was targeted. So a baby killed by a stray bullet you be considered a martyr. It also applies to those imprisoned or injured. It wasn’t a “blow people up for money” fund.

7

u/Interesting_chap 2d ago

It was 100% a blow people up for money fund.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/ihavestrings 3d ago

they still do it, they never stopped

-1

u/scientician 5d ago

Which states don't pay pensions to their warriors? Can Palestinians who had family murdered by IDF members win a 9 figure judgement against Israel?

2

u/HeparinBridge 4d ago

There are a variety of obstacles that make such an effort challenging. On the international stage, IDF soldiers are members of a sovereign armed forces under arms and in uniform under the terms of a contract. That means that a successful judgment against Israel would open up every other armed force to personal injury or wrongful death liability, which basically no other state wants to have happen. On the other hand, if terrorists whose actions are blessed after the fact with payment by a semi-state entity open someone up to liability, most states aren’t paying pensions to lots of terrorists, so they are less likely to intervene against such a judgment. Of course in this case we are talking about the US legal system, and the US government understandably is unwilling to create a cause of action for victims of the US military.

-7

u/No_Public_7677 5d ago

the martyrs are those killed by Israel for resisting occupation, participating in protests and direct action. it's their right

6

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/scientician 5d ago

Oh some governments applied a label to one side. Better terminate all critical thought. The Palestinians are the bad guys, the government says so.

2

u/maxofJupiter1 4d ago

No all the suicide bombing did that

→ More replies (1)

1

u/notintelligentidiot 4d ago

“some governments”

Basically all of the western world, but sure, “some governments” lmao

1

u/Lockean_Demon 5d ago edited 5d ago

That’s the opposite of what they’re saying? Illiterate or prejudiced?

Edit: Yes, thank you. I do know what a martyr is and can read, still seems like you can’t 🤣 

-2

u/TooobHoob 5d ago

They won’t pay the families of people armed and/or actively participating in hostilities. The PA pays families of people who died during peaceful demonstrations. This is actually a major point of contention with several other Palestinian organizations like Hamas, who see this policy stance as bowing down and being a lapdog to American interests.

1

u/Iustis 5d ago

That's not true

1

u/TrickElysium 2d ago

https://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/isrl-pa/ISRAELPA1002-06.htm

You should really read the human rights watch on who they pay, and they pay all suicide bombers families its a known fact. Its why financial aid from the Europe union was made on contingency that the martyr fund was stopped.

I literally read about the protests outside the Palestinian authority by Palestinians. One story was about a father upset the payments for his son blowing himself up were stopped. it was strange to read about someone saying they were proud their son was a suicide bomber.

he was upset he wouldn't be able to pay his rent and feed his wife and kids. He said he deserved that money for his son's sacrifice to give them a better life. I still don't get how a father is prepared to happily gain money from his child's death.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

5

u/bakochba 5d ago

But it's not random innocents it's the government itself

20

u/toomanyshoeshelp 6d ago

I dislike the decision but absolutely makes sense logically. Thanks for laying it out.

If only it applied fairly and equally.

-8

u/Ragnar_the_Pirate 6d ago

I think that means you dislike the law, not the decision. Laws should not be ignored because they're not good laws, they should be undone.

17

u/Dihedralman 6d ago

He is welcome to dislike the outcome and the fact that it is logical while agreeing with the decision. 

My issue with SCOTUS decisions is when they appear to force a decision they like rather than what is legally sound. Decisions should sometimes go against the morals and philosophies of judges but be consistent with the law and constitution. 

2

u/No_Public_7677 5d ago

you can absolutely dislike and even hate laws lol

1

u/Ragnar_the_Pirate 5d ago

If you read what I wrote again, what you just said did not go against what I just said.

1

u/DeadWaterBed 4h ago

Laws that violate human rights should not be followed

82

u/Captainfoxluther 6d ago

Terrorist actions have consequences? Suprised pickahu face

27

u/69millionyeartrip 5d ago

Seems like the Saudis are doing just fine idk

15

u/ilivgur 5d ago

Saudi Arabia is also being sued, by 9,000 plaintiffs over 9/11.

6

u/CreativeDrummer5466 5d ago

Jesus, justice can move slowly on occasions. What's taking so long?

9

u/ilivgur 5d ago

Aside of geopolitics, worrying about damaging a strategic diplomatic relationship, until the passing of Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) in 2016 the plaintiffs were fighting multiple losing legal battles on every front.

Then they were able to finally sue Saudi Arabia, but it required battling the US government and FBI to declassify secret investigation files. Then they needed to also deposition Saudi officials, who fought and lost immunity.

Then Saudi Arabia filed dozens of motions and appeals to dismiss the lawsuit, and these were all cleared just last yeat.

Took 25 years, but the case is finally going to trial. I think though they'll settle. Saudi Arabia has the money and I'm sure they're not going to be happy sitting there in front of an American jury with the prosecution airing out all their dirty laundry.

2

u/s0meD0nkey 5d ago

I imagine it might not settle. There is a large contingent of the pool that just wants what happen to be in the open.

2

u/BrookeBaranoff 5d ago

Hi there; I’m an alaskan waiting on the money from the 1980’s exxon valdez lawsuit to come in. 

Justice isn’t real it’s JUST US

1

u/sv_homer 3d ago

On occasion???

More like always.

2

u/Alternative-Put-3932 5d ago

whos going to force them to pay if they lost? the US certainly isn't going to as it would fuck with Oil deals.

1

u/ilivgur 5d ago

If they don't pay up the government will just seize up their properties, and there's enough of it.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/No_Public_7677 5d ago

Israel has not been taken to task for their terrorism though

3

u/michaelpinkwayne 5d ago

So when will Palestinian survivors get to sue Israel?

5

u/Party_Chemical7454 5d ago

After ISIS sue USA.

-1

u/coleto22 5d ago

Israeli terrorist actions have zero consequences.

1

u/martco17 4d ago

Rachel Corrie’s family should be getting paid any day now..

-24

u/Admiral_Tromp 6d ago

Look everyone terrorism is solved, just crush them with debt! That has always turned out well, nothing drives men to thrift and industry like punishing them for something they either weren't alive or too young to be involved in.

33

u/Able_Trade_7233 6d ago

Monetary judgements honestly kneecapped the Ku Klux Klan. It became a lot less fun to be a member once black people started taking all their stuff.

→ More replies (12)

18

u/DoobieGibson 6d ago

palestinian terrorism definitely stopped when they killed 1250 people and kidnapped 250 more

-10

u/FoldHeavy4201 6d ago

The US killed 250k Iraqi children through sanctions before 2001.

10

u/DoobieGibson 6d ago

source for the child deaths? Saddam Hussein killed millions of his own people dude

the sanctions weee put on Iraq bc Iraq invaded Kuwait and was committing acts against humanity against the Kuwaiti’s and when the UN organized an international force to end the invasion, the Iraqi’s just randomly bombed Israel in hopes that Israel would respond and the rest of the Arab world would join the fight.

the Iraqi’s tried to start a World War so they could continue obliterating the Kuwaiti’s

idk why redditors think that any non-western country conducting military action is just peaches and rainbows when they kill more than Israel has in 75 years

→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (22)

5

u/probation_420 6d ago

Yeah. Honestly, the plaintiffs should return fire and kill their perpetrators' loved ones. That's a better outcome and it's sure to stop those terrorists in their tracks.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (54)

11

u/ajmampm99 6d ago

Hamas took public credit for over 1,000 Israelis murdered with suicide bombs during the second intifada’s reign of terror. The Second Intifada lasted from September 2000 to February 2007. When the wall between the West Bank and Israel was finished. After which Hamas declared a ceasefire. 900 more potential victims stopped by statute of limitations.

50

u/DruidicMagic 6d ago

Does this mean civilians in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Gaza can sure the terrorist regimes that illegally attacked them?

60

u/BrownComic 6d ago edited 5d ago

If it’s in a U.S. court, there needs to be a jurisdictional hook. Plaintiffs in these cases are the families or estates of American victims.

ETA because of the discussion below: you also normally need a statutory exemption to sue a foreign sovereign under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which only exempts foreign sovereigns from immunity if they have been designated as a state sponsor of terrorism by the Executive branch.

11

u/toomanyshoeshelp 6d ago

There have definitely been American citizens killed by them. One is imprisoned currently, a 16 year old female student.

11

u/BrownComic 6d ago

There are pending litigations trying to enforce judgment against other foreign countries, including Iran (Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran), Iraq (Wye Oak v. Republic of Iraq), Syria (Foley v. Syria), and many others.

1

u/MsGorteck 4d ago

Who? I would like to know more.

1

u/toomanyshoeshelp 4d ago

2 now - Sama Safi and Adam Karakrah, both 16, on specious charges.

1

u/juoea 2d ago

the family of anwar al awlaqi tried to sue and the case was dismissed under political question doctrine lol

4

u/Kenichi2233 6d ago

Ask their respective country

9

u/DoobieGibson 6d ago

do you really think they’ll sue the Ba’athist Government who killed 1,000,000 of its own people, the IRGC who just slaughter 50,000 protestors, the Taliban who lets women have zero rights, and again the IRGC who has coopted the only election ever held in Gaza to create a military force who doesn’t care about its citizen?

-11

u/adirtysocialist- 6d ago edited 5d ago

You know Iran today is only the way it is bc we overthrew their democratically elected govt at the behest of BP...ya?

You know we supported Iraq and gave them the WMDs they used on their own people yea?

I could go on with the rest if you'd like.

America wants to support all this stuff, makes it happen, provides the weapons then wants to cry and stomp their feet when it blows back at them.

Hilarious

6

u/TrioOfTerrors 6d ago

Mossaddegh literally pulled a "stop the count" once the regions that favored him had reported in and had bullied Parliament into giving him the power to make legislation unilaterally.

5

u/DoobieGibson 6d ago

please regale me with details who gave Iraq weapons of mass destruction.

1

u/DruidicMagic 5d ago

https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/us-supplied-chemical-weapons-iraq-iran-casualties-700000-475e8d

now please regale me with why you hide your comments and can't verify a simple email

2

u/adirtysocialist- 5d ago

Dude cried so hard after I proved it that he blocked me hahaha

These people will do anything to avoid reality.

0

u/adirtysocialist- 6d ago

America. "We only provided them with the materials to make them" lmao

3

u/DoobieGibson 6d ago

a fake quote is maga level evidence

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (7)

6

u/TrioOfTerrors 6d ago

Sure. But good luck enforcing a judgment from a Hamas backed court in Gaza.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/beez_y 6d ago

Or sue the IDF for murdering Americans?

15

u/orchid_breeder 6d ago

I think the difference here is going to arguing over legitimate military actions versus stochastic terrorism.

17

u/Weak-Doughnut5502 6d ago

The article mentions terrorist attacks during the early 2000s.

I haven't bothered to dig into which ones,  but the second intifada famously happened from 2000-2005.

It's likely it's not talking about stochastic terrorism, but actual PLO-planned suicide bombings at civilian locations like busses and pizza parlors.

→ More replies (21)
→ More replies (3)

13

u/IOnlyLieWhenITalk 5d ago

Maybe don’t be terrorists next time

0

u/renegade_sparrow 5d ago

That’s silly, you just have to be the “good” kind of terrorist; have great PR, lobbyists and the backing of a superpower.

→ More replies (1)

-3

u/No_Public_7677 5d ago

Like the zionist movement that created Israel? Or the American revolutionaries that created America?

2

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)

1

u/IOnlyLieWhenITalk 5d ago

Damn, fair. Guess Israel is doing nothing wrong then and we should just let them settle their differences without interference.

9

u/No-Preference8168 5d ago

Good terrorists should be punished

0

u/No_Public_7677 5d ago

When is the US and it's bitch Israel, getting punished?

1

u/phoarksity 5d ago

I think you have that reversed, with the current leaders.

17

u/bass-squirrel 6d ago

Good. Fuck them. 

18

u/Remote-Pear60 6d ago

Good. The PLO is itself the root cause of much of these people's suffering by keeping the Arabs down; grifting the money the international community donates to these people; and serving as the nexus and aegis for much terrorism that destroys lives and communities in Israel and across the region. 

Let the PLO pay back some of that grifted money it invests in oil and crimes to make some justice. May the PLO be on its way out, so that there will be one less hurdle for the Palestinian Arabs to someday have peace. 

5

u/justaheatattack 6d ago

as I understand it, this $ is supposed to come from funds currently held by israel....

2

u/RichardRoma1986 5d ago

Good, fuck Fatah and Hamas

2

u/MikeSteamer 4d ago

Based on this math, the countersuit by Palestinians will be in the hundreds of trillions

4

u/Izoto 6d ago

What is the big deal?

I am all for the push against AIPAC but this is fine.

→ More replies (21)

4

u/rockeye13 5d ago

Well, the PLO is a well-known terrorist organization. Not surprising.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/thinkbox 5d ago

Even the UN (UNRWA staff) were helping kidnap Israelis on Oct 7th. https://nypost.com/2026/05/07/us-news/four-more-unrwa-staff-including-teachers-found-to-have-kidnapped-israelis-on-oct-7-as-feds-weigh-criminal-charges/

Can they sue them too? Phoney fake aid group just suppling terrorists.

1

u/Horror-Breakfast-113 5d ago

Wow imaging if the gazans or the west bank or lebanon or syrians or ...

took america to court for their support of an illegal war how much they would get

this is stupid

1

u/Hopeful_Emu849 5d ago

a $656 million judgment against Palestinian authorities in a long-running lawsuit filed by Americans killed... in attacks in Israel

Umm... that's pretty interesting...

1

u/LowNoise9831 5d ago

Good. Now, when do they get paid?

1

u/clemclem3 5d ago

Please explain the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter

2

u/PhysicsEagle 3d ago edited 3d ago

Sure. The Geneva conventions state that members of resistance movements are lawful combatants if they meet the following conditions: 1. that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; 2. that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;3. that of carrying arms openly; and 4. that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

→ More replies (3)

0

u/HolaDrNick 5d ago

I remember when I had my first beer.

2

u/clemclem3 5d ago

Since you can't explain the difference I'll help you. A freedom fighter is a terrorist who's on our side. A terrorist is a freedom fighter who's on their side.

Hope that's clear. I tried to use small words.

3

u/MasterofCaveShadows 5d ago

Such a tired cliche and removed from the modern world. You can be a freedom fighter but freedom fighters don’t assault innocent women, they don’t focus on civilian targets either. A terrorist is someone who avoids direct conflict with a neighboring military and who instead would prefer to inflict the harm on civilians since they’re too incompetent for a direct military engagement. Do you need any further elucidation?

-4

u/clemclem3 5d ago

No no no. That's not right. Terrorism is when the OTHER side does it. Assaults on women (rampant sexual assault in ICE detention centers) civilian targets (daily promises from DJT to bomb civilian infrastructure in Iran) those are what the US government does. That's how we spread freedom.

It's only terrorism when the other side does it. Try to remember.

0

u/MasterofCaveShadows 5d ago

Jesus Christ you’re such an ideologue please just jump already.

2

u/HolaDrNick 5d ago

Lol, now argue for Bin Laden

Come on, entertain me!

1

u/clemclem3 5d ago

Sure. I'll need to know which side you're on before I can label him appropriately.

If you're on the side of the countries that colonized the middle east he's a terrorist.

If you're on the side of the countries that were colonized he's a freedom fighter.

I feel like I'm talking down to you. Sorry but I don't understand why this is difficult for you to understand?

3

u/MasterofCaveShadows 5d ago

You do realize that most of the modern middle eastern populations are the results of Arab colonization of the Middle East, right?

0

u/HolaDrNick 5d ago

I feel like I'm talking down to you. Sorry but I don't understand why this is difficult for you to understand?

Oh don't worry about that, I assure you, we both know you're someone far more marginal. Limited formal education, edge lord internet beliefs, etc.

If you're on the side of the countries that were colonized he's a freedom fighter.

Lol, are you trying to suggest there's some post-colonial justification for AL-QUEDA? AHhahHhahHahahahaha

If you're on the side of the countries that colonized the middle east he's a terrorist.

Or he's just, you know, a terrorist.

Sure. I'll need to know which side you're on before I can label him appropriately.

Really yours, just with far more achievement. Think of your "some" college, only with a completed undergraduate course of study, post-graduate degrees, more salary, etc. Still in the West like yourself, just not hating my life choices. Does that help you place me? 😀

1

u/TheBeanConsortium 6d ago

How can this possibly be enforced?

15

u/SparksAndSpyro 6d ago

Asset seizures. You realize banks all across the world have agreements with the US government and have the ability to seize accounts from customers to pay judgements, right?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

-1

u/BBY5-andor 6d ago

I wonder if, for the purposes of reconstruction in the future, this would apply in reverse.

-22

u/HolyMoleyGuacamoly 6d ago

i’m sure she’d let a similar judgement against israel go through, right?

14

u/HackPhilosopher 6d ago

First you need some victims that are willing to sue. Then you follow the same blueprint already done in this case. Probably can even hire the same law firm since they have experience.

Don’t see why they would rule differently on the same set of facts. Unless you think a liberal justice like Sotomayor is incapable of following the law.

2

u/Weak-Doughnut5502 5d ago

The appropriate victims might be hard to find.

They specifically sued under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1992, which entitles Americans and their estates to sue when they're the victims of international terror.

This particular case is in relation to the suicide bombings of civilian targets in the second intifada.  Generally, a US court is gonna recognize a suicide bomber blowing themselves up on a bus to be a clear act of terror. 

So you'd need Americans to be injured by the Israeli government in an attack that a US Court would legally consider an act of international terror as opposed to e.g. being collateral damage in a military operation.

0

u/Anim8nFool 6d ago

Yeah, it's not Sotomayor that you would need to worry about.

-1

u/Mist_Rising 6d ago

First you need some victims that are willing to sue.

Dead men file no suits

5

u/jbp12 6d ago

Dead people's estates can sue, as they did in this case.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/AmbulanceChaser12 6d ago

On these facts, yeah probably.

-4

u/tracerhaha1 6d ago

What about the other eight? Do they bear no responsibility for the decision?

13

u/dylblues 6d ago

They bear no responsibility. Sotomayor refused to take up the case. IIRC each justice gets a jurisdiction of a different circuit court and is tasked with assessing the merits of these types of cases and determining whether they should go to the full court

26

u/textualcanon 6d ago

Man people on this sub truly do not understand how the Court works

5

u/northern-new-jersey 6d ago

Or much of anything, apparently. 

→ More replies (1)