The U.S. Supreme Court Begins Review of Requests to Seize Ancient Iranian Artifacts

The Supreme Court of the United States began reviewing requests on December 4 to seize ancient Iranian artifacts and inscriptions for sale to pay compensation to plaintiffs from the 1997 attacks by Hamas in Israel. Previously, a court of appeals had stated, contrary to the initial court ruling, that the artifacts do not belong to the Iranian government and therefore cannot be seized. The Supreme Court also announced on June 27 that it would decide on the plaintiffs' request. The plaintiffs have sued Iran for its possible role in the Hamas attack and are seeking compensation, which currently amounts to $71.5 million. In 1997, in Jerusalem, three members of Hamas carried out a suicide operation, killing five people and injuring eight American citizens. A court in Washington had ruled for compensation from Iran. These individuals requested the seizure and sale of ancient Iranian artifacts held in a museum and academic institution in Chicago. Museums claim that these artifacts belong to them, but the plaintiffs argue that Iran is the rightful owner. A significant portion of the ancient artifacts and inscriptions were loaned decades ago under a long-term agreement with the then Iranian government to the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and the Field Museum of Natural History. The Oriental Institute holds approximately 30,000 tablets. The appeals court stated that Iran lent these collections for academic and research purposes, and since this was not for commercial purposes, they cannot be seized. Iranian domestic news agencies reported that representatives of the Iranian government attended court sessions to prove that the inscriptions do not have commercial value and are not subject to seizure, as they were only provided for cultural and academic purposes. The Supreme Court is expected to decide whether, under U.S. law, foreign assets can be seized and sold for the benefit of the plaintiffs. In Monday's sessions, several judges expressed doubt about the possibility of seizing and selling the ancient artifacts. On the other hand, the plaintiffs' attorney stated that his clients had 'no other option' but to request the seizure of the inscriptions because Iran refuses to pay the compensation determined by the court. The Trump administration also opposed the seizure and sale of the inscriptions, warning that the current lawsuit in the United States could lead to retaliatory actions against the U.S. in other countries. A U.S. Department of Justice official stated on Monday during the Supreme Court session that if Congress intended to allow the seizure of assets that have 'historical and cultural significance' for the people of a country, it would have drafted clear legislation on this matter, but it has not done so. Iran is among several countries for which U.S. courts have ruled to seize and sell their properties for the benefit of victims of terrorist attacks. However, enforcing U.S. court rulings, whether under U.S. law or international law, is not an easy task. U.S. courts do not allow access to the non-commercial assets of a foreign government until that government is listed as a 'state sponsor of terrorism' by the U.S. government. Iran is on the U.S. State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism. Tehran has always denied supporting terrorism.