WASHINGTON – Tonight the
Senate unanimously approved the
Anti-Terrorism
Clarification Act of 2018, which improves access to justice in
U.S. courts for Americans who are victimized by acts of terrorism while
abroad. The legislation, introduced by Senate Judiciary Committee
Chairman Chuck Grassley, makes needed improvements to the
Antiterrorism Act
of 1992, also introduced by Grassley, which has been misinterpreted by some
federal courts, weakening Congress’ intent for the law.
The
bill was
introduced
in May by Grassley, and cosponsored by Senators Bill Nelson
(D-Fla.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ted Cruz
(R-Texas), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Christopher
Coons (D-Del.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), John Kennedy
(R-La.) and John Boozman (R-Ark.). It
cleared
the Senate Judiciary Committee in July.
The
measure will now move to the House of Representatives for final passage.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Ranking Member Jerrold
Nadler introduced companion legislation that passed July 23.
“Over twenty-five years ago, I led the Senate’s effort to pass the
Antiterrorism Act to improve justice for Americans victimized by acts of
terrorism abroad. Congress’ intent was clear: U.S. victims of international
terrorism should be able to seek justice in U.S. courts against those
responsible, no matter where the attacks occurred. But recent flawed court
decisions have undermined the law’s purpose. Our bill is a carefully balanced
approach to better ensure victims’ access to compensation and to hold
supporters of terrorism accountable. I thank my colleagues for their bipartisan
work to advance this important bill, and I look forward to President Trump
signing it into law,” Grassley said.
A
brief description of the bill’s provisions follows.
Ending “Acts of War” Exemption Abuse
The Antiterrorism Act of 1992
exempted lawful “acts of war” from the scope of its civil liability provisions.
However, some defendants accused of aiding and abetting acts of international
terrorism have successfully claimed in court that the law’s “act of war”
defense shields them from civil liability, even when the act of terrorism was
perpetrated by a designated terrorist group. The Anti-Terrorism
Clarification Act of 2018 clarifies that the “act of war” defense does not
apply to acts carried out by entities designated as foreign terrorist
organizations by the U.S. government or any person that has been determined by
the court to not be a military force. This simple amendment will help ensure
that American victims of terrorism—including soldiers and other personnel
serving abroad—can have their rightful day in court.
Expanding Access to Remedies for
Victims of Narco-Terrorism
Under current law, American victims of
terrorism may use the assets of a perpetrating terrorist entity that are frozen
by the U.S. government to satisfy court-awarded judgments. Assets frozen under
the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (“Kingpin Act”), however,
currently remain unavailable to victims of terrorism. This leaves victims of
narco-terrorism or other drug-related terrorist activity without a meaningful
method of satisfying their Antiterrorism Act judgments. The Anti-Terrorism
Clarification Act clarifies that assets blocked under the Kingpin Act are
available to victims.
Clarifies U.S. Court Jurisdiction in
Foreign Terrorism Cases
Recent flawed court decisions have
called into question the Antiterrorism Act’s continued ability to hold
terrorists or their supporters accountable in U.S. courts. For example, the
Supreme Court’s recent decision to deny certiorari in
Sokolow v. Palestine
Liberation Organization—a case in which Chairman Grassley
led
a bipartisan amicus brief—leaves in place a flawed circuit court
decision gutting the extraterritorial scope of the 1992 law. Carrying out or
assisting an act of international terrorism that injures or kills Americans
abroad should provide sufficient justification to subject defendants to U.S.
legal sanctions. Moreover, no one benefiting from a U.S. program, such as
foreign assistance, or maintaining a presence in the United States should be
able to simultaneously dodge responsibility in U.S. courts for involvement in
terrorist attacks that harm Americans. The
Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act
clarifies that certain defendants who take advantage of benefits under certain
U.S. laws shall be deemed to have consented to jurisdiction in U.S. courts for
any
Antiterrorism Act lawsuit.
Text
of the
Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act of 2018 is available
HERE.
-30-