In a landmark decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has reinstated a $655.5 million jury verdict against the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (PA), marking the end of a decade-long jurisdictional tug-of-war.
The ruling in Sokolow v. Palestine Liberation Organization requires the defendants to pay damages for their role in terrorist attacks that injured or killed American citizens in Israel between 2002 and 2004.
In 2002, the height of the Second Intifada saw 47 suicide bombings in Israel, prompting the launch of Operation Defensive Shield. Major attacks that year included the Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades’ March 2nd bombing in Jerusalem’s Beit Yisrael neighborhood (11 fatalities) and an April 12th bombing at Mahane Yehuda Market (6 fatalities). Hamas carried out several devastating strikes: the March 9th Café Moment bombing (11 fatalities), the March 27th Passover Massacre at the Park Hotel in Netanya (30 fatalities), the March 31st Matza Restaurant bombing in Haifa (15 fatalities), a May 7th pool hall bombing in Rishon Lezion (16 fatalities), the June 18th attack on Jerusalem bus #32A (19 fatalities), and the July 31st bombing at the Hebrew University cafeteria (9 fatalities). Additionally, Islamic Jihad targeted public transport with car bombs on June 5th in Megiddo (17 fatalities) and October 21st in Karkur (14 fatalities).
Throughout 2003 and 2004, violence continued despite increased security and the construction of the West Bank barrier. In 2003, Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades launched a double suicide bombing at the Tel Aviv Central Bus Station on January 5th (23 fatalities), while Hamas struck Haifa bus #37 on March 5th (17 fatalities), Mike’s Place pub on April 30th (3 fatalities), Jerusalem bus #14A on June 11th (17 fatalities), the Shmuel HaNavi bus massacre on August 19th (23 fatalities), and Café Hillel on September 9th (7 fatalities). Islamic Jihad also bombed the Maxim Restaurant on October 4th (21 fatalities). In 2004, attacks shifted toward transport hubs, including Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades’ bombings of Jerusalem buses #19 and #14 on January 29th and February 22nd (11 and 8 fatalities, respectively). Joint Hamas and Fatah operations hit the Ashdod Port on March 14th (10 fatalities), followed by Hamas’s twin bus bombings in Beersheba on August 31st (16 fatalities) and a PFLP bombing at the Carmel Market on November 1st (3 fatalities).
The case was originally filed in 2004 under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) by victims and their families. After a seven-week trial in 2015, a jury found the PLO and PA liable and awarded the plaintiffs hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.
However, the legal victory was short-lived. The Second Circuit later vacated that judgment in 2016, ruling that U.S. courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants. For years, the victims remained in legal limbo as Congress scrambled to fix the jurisdictional gap.
In 2019, Congress passed the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA), whose lead sponsor was Oklahoma GOP senator James Lankford. This statute created a “deemed consent” framework, which established that certain activities, including “martyr payments” to the families of terrorists, could be treated as consent to U.S. jurisdiction.
Initially, the Second Circuit struck down this law too, claiming it violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. However, the Supreme Court intervened in 2025 (Fuld v. PLO), reversing the Second Circuit. The High Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment — which governs the federal government — allows for more jurisdictional flexibility than the Fourteenth Amendment when national security and foreign policy are at stake.
The court exercised its “extraordinary” power to recall its 2016 mandate that had dismissed the case. It cited the PSJVTA as a “supervening change in governing law.” The court noted that the political branches (Congress and the president) clearly intended for this law to apply to this specific case to provide relief to victims of terror.
The defendants argued that because the court lacked jurisdiction in 2015, the original judgment was “absolutely void” and could never be revived. The court rejected this argument. They explained that a legal mistake about whether a court has power over someone (jurisdiction) can be corrected later by new laws or by a person’s conduct after a trial.
Because the defendants continued making “martyr payments” even after a new law (the PSJVTA) was passed, they effectively gave the court the green light to proceed with the case. By continuing to make those payments, they made the earlier court decision against them legally binding.
In a final attempt to avoid payment, the PLO and PA argued for a new trial, claiming the district court allowed “improper” expert testimony regarding their internal structure and support for terrorism. The Second Circuit dismissed this, ruling that:
- Experts are allowed to explain the hierarchy and practices of terrorist organizations.
- The jury was properly instructed to weigh the experts’ testimony against their own common sense.
- The district court did not commit “manifest error” in its gatekeeping role.
The Second Circuit emphasized that after 21 years of litigation, the interests of justice, judicial economy, and finality outweighed the defendants’ procedural complaints. Many of the original plaintiffs have since passed away or are too ill to travel for a new trial.
By affirming the original $655.5 million judgment, the court has sent a clear message: the legislative and executive branches have the authority to hold foreign entities accountable for terrorism involving American nationals, and those entities cannot use “due process” as a shield when their own post-enactment conduct invites federal jurisdiction.
Thus, the PLO and PA are officially held to account.
