Skip to main content

FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ACT

Republic of Hungary v. Simon

Issues

Do district courts have the discretion to abstain from exercising jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act for reasons pertaining to international comity?

 This case asks the Supreme Court to decide whether the common-law doctrine of international comity provides federal courts with the discretion to dismiss claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”). Respondent the Republic of Hungary argues that the FSIA must be construed in light of international comity doctrine, and that the federal court should defer to Hungary as Hungary’s interests in hearing this case outweigh those of the United States. Petitioners Rosalie Simon and other Hungarian Holocaust survivors argue that the FSIA has displaced common law and that federal courts should exercise jurisdiction in cases such as this one, where a sovereign state has failed to provide an adequate alternate forum. The outcome of this case will have implications on foreign policy, the extraterritorial reach of U.S. law, and the remedies available to the victims of Holocaust.

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

Whether a district court may abstain from exercising jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act for reasons of international comity, in a matter in which former Hungarian nationals have sued the nation of Hungary to recover the value of property lost in Hungary during World War II but the plaintiffs made no attempt to exhaust local Hungarian remedies.

During World War II, Hungary undertook a systematic campaign to eradicate its Jewish population. Simon v. Republic of Hungary, (D.C. Cir. 2018) at 1175. As part of this campaign, the Hungarian government stripped Jews of their belongings. Id. Government officials went “home to home, inventorying and confiscating Jewish property.” Simon v.

Written by

Edited by

Additional Resources

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ACT