03-13 Republic of Austria v. Altmann

Listen to this article

“Nothing in the FSIA or the circumstances surrounding its enactment suggests that it should not be applied to petitioners’ 1948 actions. Indeed, clear evidence that Congress intended it to apply to preenactment conduct lies in its preamble’s statement that foreign states’ immunity “[c]laims … should henceforth be decided by [American] courts … in conformity with the principles set forth in this chapter,” §1602 (emphasis added). Though perhaps not sufficient to satisfy Landgraf’’s “express command” requirement, 511 U.S., at 280, this language is unambiguous: Immunity “claims”-not actions protected by immunity, but assertions of immunity to suits arising from those actions-are the relevant conduct regulated by the Act and are “henceforth” to be decided by the courts. Thus, Congress intended courts to resolve all such claims “in conformity with [FSIA] principles” regardless of when the underlying conduct occurred. The FSIA’s overall structure strongly supports this conclusion: Many of its provisions unquestionably apply to cases arising out of conduct that occurred before 1976, see, e.g., Dole Food Co., supra, and its procedural provisions undoubtedly apply to all pending cases. In this context, it would be anomalous to presume that an isolated provision (such as the expropriation exception on which respondent relies) is of purely prospective application absent any statutory language to that effect. Finally, applying the FSIA to all pending cases regardless of when the underlying conduct occurred is most consistent with two of the Act’s principal purposes: clarifying the rules judges should apply in resolving sovereign immunity claims and eliminating political participation in the resolution of such claims.

327 F.3d 1246, affirmed.

Local effect:

The Seventh Circuit expressly declined to address the particular issue in this case, in Sampson v. Federal Republic of Germany, 250 F.3d 1145, 1149, fn.3 (7th Cir. 2001).

Stevens, J.; Scalia, J., concurring; Breyer, J., concurring; Kennedy, J., dissenting.