Supreme Court Oral Arguments

[23-867] Republic of Hungary v. Simon


Listen Later

Republic of Hungary v. Simon

Wikipedia · Justia · Docket · oyez.org

Argued on Dec 3, 2024.

Petitioner: Republic of Hungary.
Respondent: Rosalie Simon.

Advocates:

  • Joshua S. Glasgow (for the Petitioners)
  • Sopan Joshi (for the United States, as amicus curiae, supporting the Petitioners)
  • Shay Dvoretzky (for the Respondents)
  • Facts of the case (from oyez.org)

    This case arises from the Hungarian government’s confiscation of Jewish-owned property during the Holocaust. In 1944, Hungary rapidly exterminated over half a million Jews and seized their property. Fourteen Holocaust survivors sued Hungary and its agency, Magyar Államvasutak Zrt., seeking compensation for this seized property. To overcome Hungary’s sovereign immunity, the plaintiffs invoked the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s expropriation exception, asserting they were either stateless or Czechoslovakian nationals at the time of the takings, not Hungarian nationals. This claim was made in response to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Fed. Republic of Germany v. Philipp that a country’s taking of property from its own nationals is generally excluded from the FSIA’s expropriation exception.

    The case has a complex litigation history, with multiple appeals focusing on the plaintiffs’ nationality status and FSIA jurisdiction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the plaintiffs’ allegations were sufficient to shift the burden of proof to Hungary to disprove, contrasting with the Second Circuit’s decision that plaintiffs must demonstrate a link between the expropriated property’s funds and U.S. commercial activity.

    Question

    1. Does historical commingling of assets suffice to establish that proceeds of seized property have a commercial nexus with the United States under the expropriation exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act?

    2. Must a plaintiff make out a valid claim that an exception to the FSIA applies at the pleading stage, rather than merely raising a plausible inference?

    3. Does a sovereign defendant bear the burden of producing evidence to affirmatively disprove that the proceeds of property taken in violation of international law have a commercial nexus with the United States under the expropriation exception to the FSIA?

     

    ...more
    View all episodesView all episodes
    Download on the App Store

    Supreme Court Oral ArgumentsBy scotusstats.com

    • 4.8
    • 4.8
    • 4.8
    • 4.8
    • 4.8

    4.8

    22 ratings


    More shows like Supreme Court Oral Arguments

    View all
    We the People by National Constitution Center

    We the People

    1,107 Listeners

    GLoP Culture by Ricochet

    GLoP Culture

    1,801 Listeners

    Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts by Slate Podcasts

    Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts

    3,482 Listeners

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments by Oyez

    U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments

    652 Listeners

    Cases and Controversies by Bloomberg Law

    Cases and Controversies

    153 Listeners

    The Remnant with Jonah Goldberg by The Dispatch

    The Remnant with Jonah Goldberg

    6,492 Listeners

    Strict Scrutiny by Crooked Media

    Strict Scrutiny

    5,674 Listeners

    Advisory Opinions by The Dispatch

    Advisory Opinions

    3,790 Listeners

    The Dispatch Podcast by The Dispatch

    The Dispatch Podcast

    3,218 Listeners

    The Ezra Klein Show by New York Times Opinion

    The Ezra Klein Show

    15,470 Listeners

    Amarica's Constitution by Akhil Reed Amar

    Amarica's Constitution

    372 Listeners

    Divided Argument by Will Baude, Dan Epps

    Divided Argument

    669 Listeners

    Honestly with Bari Weiss by The Free Press

    Honestly with Bari Weiss

    8,606 Listeners

    Shield of the Republic by The Bulwark

    Shield of the Republic

    463 Listeners

    Main Justice by MSNBC

    Main Justice

    7,031 Listeners