Their Day in Court — after 80 Years        

IT has been some 80 years since the Nazis and elements of the Hungarian government stripped hundreds of thousands of Jews of their property and herded them into ghettos and concentration camps. Yet only only a few weeks ago, the Supreme Court weighed whether the arm of the law is long enough to give a group of survivors a chance at redress from Hungary in American courts.

In general, the law shields foreign governments from having to defend themselves against suits in US courts, but a slim list of exceptions includes people whose property was taken in violation of international law and then used in America. The survivors argue that since their money and possessions were seized by Hungary’s state railway (MAV) and placed in the government’s coffers, and Hungary has engaged in bond sales and financial dealings in the US over the ensuing decades, that standard was met.

“Hungary and MAV stole respondents’ property while forcing them onto cattle cars,” the survivor’s attorney, Shay Dvoretzky, told the justices. “MAV deposited money exchanged for respondents’ property into funds it continues to hold, and that satisfies the exception given MAV’s commercial activity here.”

The case revolves around dueling readings of the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which set guidelines for when countries are immune from legal actions in the United States. Among its exceptions are attempts to gain compensation for Nazi war crimes and acts of terrorism.