I Get By With Alittle Help From My Friends....
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
I Get By With Alittle Help From My Friends....

Dinar Outcast


You are not connected. Please login or register

Supreme Court ruling on lawsuits against Iraq

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

windreader1



First topic for discussion

"WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday ruled unanimously that the current Iraqi government cannot be held responsible in U.S. courts for the acts of Saddam Hussein's regime.

Foreign nations usually are immune from lawsuits in U.S. courts, but federal law strips that protection from countries that support terrorism. Under Saddam, Iraq was considered a state sponsor of terrorism. But the Iraqi government says the U.S.-led invasion that deposed Saddam and a federal law enacted in 2003 restored Iraq's immunity to lawsuits in American courts. The court agreed.

"Iraq's sovereign immunity was restored when the president exercised his authority to make inapplicable with respect to Iraq any provision of law that applies to countries that have supported terrorism," said Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the opinion for the court.

Americans who were held in Iraq during the Gulf War argued that the law passed by Congress did not give the new regime blanket immunity from lawsuits in U.S. courts even though it removed Iraq's designation as a terrorist state. Americans suing Iraq include CBS News correspondent Bob Simon, who was held for more than a month during the Gulf War in 1991.

The Iraqi government also is being sued by the children of Kenneth Beaty, an oil rig supervisor, and by the children of William Barloon, an aircraft maintenance supervisor.

In 2001, U.S. District Court Judge Louis Oberdorfer in Washington, D.C., found the two men had been tortured after being illegally detained in Baghdad. The judge awarded Beaty, of Mustang, Okla., $4.2 million, and awarded Barloon, of Jacksonville, Fla., $2.9 million.

At issue in the case brought by the men's children is whether a federal law enacted in 2003 and a related presidential order restored immunity from lawsuits to Iraq.

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia says it does not, that the law applies narrowly to legal restrictions on assistance and money for the new Iraqi government.

[i]Chief Justice John Roberts, then an appeals court judge, said in an earlier case that the 2003 law and the president's order were sufficient to block the lawsuits."



When I read this, my gut reaction was WOW, this is huge. After due consideration, I believe that it is even bigger than WOW and this is why.

To give you the background, several weeks back there was an article regarding lawsuits that had been filed against Iraq from American citizens. At that time there was some concern that this was another problem for Iraq that could affect the RV. I raised the point that these were probably lawsuits due to actions prior to the 2003 UN action that gave immunity to Iraq. As it turned out that was true.

The Supreme Court ruling today did more than just eliminate these lawsuits. It stated that no one could file a lawsuit against Iraq funds held in the U.S. This includes Kuwait and Saudi and any other entity that has filed a claim with the UN. Right now there are billions of dollars that are being held in trust for Iraq, these include the DFI, frozen assets and the compensation fund. If Kuwait or Saudi wanted to file a lawsuit against those funds they would have to be filed in a U.S. court.

The Supreme Courts action also sets a precedent in International Law regarding lawsuits against funds held by a country. This could be used by other countries to stop the filing of lawsuits against any funds that are held in that country.

Let’s take this one step further. Right now there is a major battle going between Kuwait and Iraq regarding the removal of Iraq from Chapter 7. Kuwait has been running all over the world meeting with countries with a vote on the Security Council. Kuwait has been very outspoken as to why Iraq needs to stay under Chapter 7. Kuwait wants money and all the other issues. Ck and I figured this one out sometime back that there was only one reason for this sudden urgency to meet with all these countries. Kuwait is afraid the UN is going to eliminate Chapter 7. There have been many articles that have subsequently been posted that confirm this as a possibility.

The UN set up the compensation fund and determined how much Iraq had to pay. It started at 30%, then went to 25% and then to 5%. Kuwait had no voice in the decision to reduce the percent that Iraq had to pay. The UN also made the determination from all the claims that were filed exactly what the total amount was that was due. The UN controls this whole scenario. The UN set it up and the UN can eliminate it. Kuwait knows that.

Once Chapter 7 is gone, then the immunity established by the UN would also be null and void. Iraq gets back its international status that it had prior to the start of all the sanctions in 1990. All economic control would be turned back over to Iraq. But hold on, we are not done with the immunity issue yet. Obama extended the Executive Order on the immunity of funds held in the U.S. until May 2010. So Chapter 7 goes away, but the funds still have immunity under the Executive Order as well as under the Supreme Court ruling announced today.

This is now a double whammy for Kuwait. There will be no recourse under international law if Chapter 7 is eliminated. So what is the next news item, “emergency meeting is called between Kuwait and Iraq to discuss the removal of Iraq from Chapter 7”

June is going to be very interesting. Does this have an impact on the RV? Only time will tell. I don’t make predictions regarding the RV. I just look for signposts along the way and I think we saw a huge signpost today.

Tell me what you think.

Guest


Guest

BRAVOOOOOO!! The timing of this "new" ruling is very interesting to me too.

let me sleep on all this info and see if I can be able to add more to it.

Guest


Guest

Wind, I like your thoughts on this issue. Thanks for breaking it all down. I agree, I think we just saw a signpost.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum