Skip to content
Case File
d-24797House OversightOther

Court opinion on Alien Tort Statute claims related to alleged material support for al‑Qaeda

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #023399
Pages
2
Persons
2

Summary

The passage is a legal brief discussing procedural arguments and statutory interpretation. It does not introduce new factual leads, names of individuals, financial transactions, or undisclosed actors. Plaintiffs allege defendants funded al‑Qaeda in Sudan during the early 1990s. District court dismissed ATS claims for lack of alleged hijacking‑specific allegations. The brief argues ATS covers broad

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Persons Referenced (2)

Tags

alien-tort-statutematerial-supportforeign-influence911legal-precedentlegal-exposurehouse-oversightterrorism-financing
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

9/11 Victims’ Plaintiffs Argue Material Support Claims Should Survive Statute‑of‑Limitations Challenges

The passage outlines procedural arguments in a 9/11‑related tort case, citing statutes of limitations and equitable tolling. It does not reveal new actors, financial flows, or undisclosed misconduct, Plaintiffs allege defendants provided knowing material support to al‑Qaeda that enabled 9/11 attacks The district court dismissed negligence, NIED, and intentional tort claims on statute‑of‑limitatio

2p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

MDL filings reveal Saudi banks and bin Laden family entities dismissed in 9/11 terrorism lawsuits

The document lists dozens of Saudi financial institutions and members of the bin Laden family as defendants in the September 11th multidistrict litigation, showing that plaintiffs alleged their suppor Seventy‑five defendants, including major Saudi banks and bin Laden family members, were part of a jo Plaintiffs seek to vacate dismissals of Al Rajhi Bank, SAMBA, DMI Trust, Saleh Abdullah Kamel, and

2p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Appeal urges court to allow jurisdictional discovery into Saudi-linked sovereign defendants in 9/11 litigation

The passage indicates plaintiffs are seeking discovery to determine whether NCB (National Commercial Bank) and other defendants are instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which could expose f Plaintiffs argue NCB is an instrumentality of Saudi Arabia and request jurisdictional discovery. The appeal seeks reversal of dismissals of sovereign defendants under FSIA. Approximately 20 defendant

2p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Second Circuit Appeal Criticizes District Court’s Narrow Construction of ATA, ATS, and TVPA in 9/11 Terrorism Lawsuit

The passage is a judicial opinion discussing legal errors in a terrorism‑related civil case. It does not reveal new factual allegations, financial flows, or direct involvement of high‑level officials. Court narrowed the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and Terrorist Victims Protection Act (TVPA) improperly. Plaintiffs alleged material support to al‑Qaeda by defendants, but the district court required an o

2p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Court dismisses multiple defendants in SAAR Network terrorism financing lawsuits

The passage outlines procedural dismissals of claims that various organizations and individuals funded terrorist groups via the SAAR Network. It provides specific entity names, alleged money‑launderin Defendants include African Muslim Agency, Grove Corporate, Heritage Education Trust, International I Plaintiffs allege these entities were co‑conspirators, material sponsors, or aiders/abettors of th

2p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Procedural appellate review of 9/11 terrorism support lawsuits

The document outlines jurisdictional and procedural issues in appellate review of existing 9/11 lawsuits, without revealing new allegations, financial flows, or specific powerful actors. It offers lim Plaintiffs allege material support to al‑Qaeda by five defendants under the Anti‑Terrorism Act. Multiple defendants were dismissed in prior district‑court orders (2005‑2010). Appeals were filed in Au

2p

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.