Supreme Court Rules for Bank in Fight Over Hamas Victim Suit

The US Supreme Court threw out a ruling that gave families of victims killed in Hamas attacks another chance to hold a Lebanese bank liable for allegedly aiding and abetting terrorists.

In a unanimous ruling Thursday, the court sent the case back to the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

The justices said the appeals court should only have considered if Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was satisfied. That rule requires the families to show ‘extraordinary circumstances’ to justify the reopening of a final judgment.

Dozens of victims and the families of victims alleged in their original lawsuit that BLOM Bank SAL helped three Hamas fundraisers–Sanabil, Subul al-Khair, and Union of Good–convert millions of dollars in donations abroad into cash, which was then used to recruit Palestinians living in Lebanon to join and support Hamas.

To hold the bank liable under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, the victims had to plausibly allege the bank was generally aware of its customers’ alleged ties to Hamas. The district court said the families failed to do that, despite multiple opportunities to amend their lawsuit, and tossed their case.

The Second Circuit affirmed that ruling but later gave the families another to chance to amend their complaint, reversing the district court’s refusal to reopen the case.

The appeals court said the district court was supposed to balance Rule 15(a) of the Rules for Civil Procedure, which liberally allows parties to amend their suits, with Rule 60 (b)(6), which required a showing of extraordinary circumstances to reopen a final judgment so the families’ could amend their complaint.

The case is BLOM Bank SAL v. Honickman, U.S., No. 23-1259.