Germany v. Philipp
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp'', 592 U.S. ___ (2021), was a
United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...
case that dealt with the applicability of the
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) is a United States law, codified at Title 28, §§ 1330, 1332, 1391(f), 1441(d), and 1602–1611 of the United States Code, that established criteria as to whether a foreign sovereign nation ( ...
(FSIA) for heirs of victims of the
Holocaust The Holocaust, also known as the Shoah, was the genocide of European Jews during World War II. Between 1941 and 1945, Nazi Germany and its collaborators systematically murdered some six million Jews across German-occupied Europe; ...
to sue
Germany Germany,, officially the Federal Republic of Germany, is a country in Central Europe. It is the second most populous country in Europe after Russia, and the most populous member state of the European Union. Germany is situated betwe ...
in the United States court systems for compensation for items that were taken by the
Nazi Party The Nazi Party, officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party (german: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP), was a far-right political party in Germany active between 1920 and 1945 that created and supported t ...
during
World War II World War II or the Second World War, often abbreviated as WWII or WW2, was a world war that lasted from 1939 to 1945. It involved the vast majority of the world's countries—including all of the great powers—forming two opposing ...
. At issue in the case was whether claims fell within the FSIA’s exception to sovereign immunity for “property taken in violation of international law,” 28 U.S.C. §1605(a)(3), given that the sovereign here was alleged to have engaged in a taking of its own nationals’ property; and whether courts can invoke the doctrine of international comity under the FSIA to abstain from exercising jurisdiction based on prudential considerations. In an unanimous opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, the Court held that FSIA does not allow these survivors to sue Germany in U.S. court, as the sale was an act of
expropriation Nationalization (nationalisation in British English) is the process of transforming privately-owned assets into public assets by bringing them under the public ownership of a national government or state. Nationalization usually refers to pri ...
of property rather than an act of genocide, though other means of recovery are still potentially available. The decision also resolved a related case, ''Republic of'' ''Hungary v. Simon'', which examined the application of the doctrines of international comity and ''
forum non conveniens ''Forum non conveniens'' (Latin for "an inconvenient forum") (FNC) is a mostly common law legal doctrine through which a court acknowledges that another forum or court where the case might have been brought is a more appropriate venue for a legal ...
'' for expropriation exception cases brought under the FSIA. The Court decided the case ''
per curiam In law, a ''per curiam'' decision (or opinion) is a ruling issued by an appellate court of multiple judges in which the decision rendered is made by the court (or at least, a majority of the court) acting collectively (and typically, though not ...
'' based on the ruling of ''Germany v. Philipp'' on February 3, 2021.


Background

During World War II, the Nazi Party imprisoned numerous people, including a large number of Jewish people, and stripped them of their possessions. In other cases, the Nazi rule forced these people to sell their possessions at significantly reduced prices. At the center of the current case is the
Guelph Treasure The Guelph Treasure (German: ''Welfenschatz'') is a collection of medieval ecclesiastical art originally housed at Brunswick Cathedral in Braunschweig, Germany. The Treasure takes its name from the princely House of Guelph (German: ''Welf'') of B ...
with an estimated value of in 2020. The items were purchased by a consortium of Jewish art dealers prior to the war, but they were then forced to sell the collection at a third of its value in 1935 to agents of
Hermann Göring Hermann Wilhelm Göring (or Goering; ; 12 January 1893 – 15 October 1946) was a German politician, military leader and convicted war criminal. He was one of the most powerful figures in the Nazi Party, which ruled Germany from 1933 to 1 ...
. After the war, the Guelph Treasure pieces were moved to the
Kunstgewerbemuseum Berlin __NOTOC__ The Kunstgewerbemuseum, or Museum of Decorative Arts, is an internationally important museum of the decorative arts in Berlin, Germany, part of the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Berlin State Museums). The collection is split between t ...
(Museum of Decorative Arts) which is overseen by the Federal Republic of Germany under the
Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation The Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation (german: Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz; SPK) is a German federal government body that oversees 27 museums and cultural organizations in and around Berlin, Germany. Its purview includes all of Berlin's ...
, where they have remained as part of the exhibits. Heirs of the Jewish art dealers began seeking means to recover the collection from Germany around 2008, first seeking action within Germany itself. They argued that any post-1933 sale should be treated as an act of coercion and thus considered invalid, but Germany ruled that the dealers sold the collection voluntarily and were compensated fairly, and thus the collection was acquired legitimately. The heirs turned to United States courts to sue Germany under the
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) is a United States law, codified at Title 28, §§ 1330, 1332, 1391(f), 1441(d), and 1602–1611 of the United States Code, that established criteria as to whether a foreign sovereign nation ( ...
(FSIA), which normally gives immunities to foreign countries except in certain situations. The heirs claimed that the FSIA allowed for countries to be sued for violations of "rights in property taken in violation of international law", of which the acts of genocide that the Nazi Party performed during World War II would qualify. The heirs brought suit against Germany and the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation to the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia The United States District Court for the District of Columbia (in case citations, D.D.C.) is a federal district court in the District of Columbia. It also occasionally handles (jointly with the United States District Court for the District ...
, seeking the value of the collection in compensation in exchange for letting Germany retain the collection. Germany moved to dismiss the case, claiming that the FSIA clause related to "rights in property" did not apply to the sale since there was no involvement of a foreign state at the time. The district court denied Germany's motion to dismiss. Germany appealed this to the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (in case citations, D.C. Cir.) is one of the thirteen United States Courts of Appeals. It has the smallest geographical jurisdiction of any of the U.S. federal appellate co ...
, which upheld the District Court's refusal to dismiss. Subsequently, Germany filed a petition to the Supreme Court to rule on the applicability of FSIA to the case. The Court certified the case in July 2020.


Supreme Court

Oral hearings for the case were held on December 7, 2020, alongside those of ''Hungary v. Simon'', a related case involving the use of FSIA to compensate heirs to Polish victims of the Holocaust whose possesses were stolen while they were transported to concentration camps. Observers to the oral hearings said that the Justices were wary of placing the United States court system in the middle of foreign affairs, a matter better resolved by the State Department. The Supreme Court ruled in both cases on February 3, 2021. Chief Justice
John Roberts John Glover Roberts Jr. (born January 27, 1955) is an American lawyer and jurist who has served as the 17th chief justice of the United States since 2005. Roberts has authored the majority opinion in several landmark cases, including '' Nat ...
delivered the unanimous opinion of the court for ''Germany'' vacating the lower court rulings and remanding the case for further consideration. The court determined that the heirs did not qualify for the "rights in property" allowance under the FSIA, which is reserved for the taking of property from one state by another, and not between a foreign state and individuals. Roberts' opinion believed that they needed to consider the original sale of the art under act of
expropriation Nationalization (nationalisation in British English) is the process of transforming privately-owned assets into public assets by bringing them under the public ownership of a national government or state. Nationalization usually refers to pri ...
rather than genocide in determining if FSIA applied. Roberts also relied on an international case law from '' Jurisdictional Immunities of the State'' heard by the
International Court of Justice The International Court of Justice (ICJ; french: Cour internationale de justice, links=no; ), sometimes known as the World Court, is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations (UN). It settles disputes between states in accordanc ...
, a rarity for the Supreme Court, while had determined for Germany that "a state is not deprived of immunity by reason of the fact that it is accused of serious violations of international human rights law." Roberts wrote that by taking the heirs' position, they would undermine other provisions of FSIA that Congress had explicitly included, and open the United States itself to claims from other foreign courts. Roberts stated in his opinion that there may be other means through which the heirs could seek legal redress from Germany in the United States court systems beyond FSIA, which should be explored with the remanded case. In ''Hungary v. Simon'', the court issued a ''
per curiam In law, a ''per curiam'' decision (or opinion) is a ruling issued by an appellate court of multiple judges in which the decision rendered is made by the court (or at least, a majority of the court) acting collectively (and typically, though not ...
'' order based on the ''Germany'' decision to remand its case back to lower courts for further review.


References


External links

* {{caselaw source , case = ''Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp'', {{ussc, 592, ___, 2021, el=no , justia = https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/592/19-351/ , oyez = https://www.oyez.org/cases/2020/19-351 , other_source1 = Supreme Court (slip opinion) , other_url1 = https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-351_o7jp.pdf 2021 in United States case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act case law