Skip to content
Case File
d-25223House OversightFinancial Record

Court dismisses claims against Saudi princes for alleged 9/11 charity donations

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #017866
Pages
1
Persons
3

Summary

The passage outlines a court's legal reasoning dismissing plaintiffs' allegations that Prince Sultan and Prince Turki knowingly funded al‑Qaeda fronts. It provides no new factual allegations, financia Plaintiffs failed to present specific facts showing the princes knew charities were terrorist fronts The court applied the discretionary function exception to bar claims against the princes. Referenc

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Persons Referenced (3)

Tags

discretionary-functionfinancial-flowlegal-filingfsialegal-exposuresaudi-arabiahouse-oversightterrorism-financing
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Saudi charities alleged as instrumentalities of the Kingdom in 9/11 litigation

The passage outlines plaintiffs' claims that several Saudi charities function as arms of the Saudi government and funded 9/11, but the court dismisses the claims on sovereign immunity grounds. While t Plaintiffs name specific charities (MWL, IIRO, WAMY, Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, Rabita Trust, e References to Senate sub‑committee testimony and independent task‑force reports on Saudi terrorist

2p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Court denies plaintiffs' attempt to link Saudi princes to al‑Qaida‑funding charities in 9/11 FSIA case

The passage reveals a procedural fight over alleged evidence that Prince Salman and Prince Naif knowingly funded terrorist charities, but the court found the evidence unauthenticated and rejected it. Plaintiffs sought to supplement the record with a 1998 Egyptian article alleging Saudi princes funde The court rejected the submission due to lack of authentication and timing issues. SHC (Saudi Huma

2p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Court dismisses jurisdiction claim over Saudi donor alleged in ‘Golden Chain’ al‑Qaeda document

The passage references the controversial ‘Golden Chain’ document that allegedly lists a Saudi businessman, Mr. Al‑Jomaih, as an early al‑Qaeda donor. While the claim is unverified and the court found ‘Golden Chain’ document discovered by Bosnian authorities in 2002 claims early al‑Qaeda donors. Mr. Al‑Jomaih, a Saudi national with alleged ties to GM and Shell, is named in the document. Plaintiffs

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Judge dismisses claims against Saudi Prince Sultan and Prince Turki for lack of personal jurisdiction in 9/11 terrorism lawsuits

The passage identifies alleged financial links between Saudi princes and charities accused of supporting al Qaeda, but provides no concrete evidence, transaction details, or dates. It highlights a pro Prince Sultan was accused of donating to charities that allegedly funded al Qaeda, but the court fou Prince Turki is alleged to have made personal donations to Saudi charities linked to terrorism, ye

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Court limits jurisdiction over claims linking Saudi princes and charities to Al Qaeda funding

The passage outlines a federal district court’s detailed rulings on jurisdiction and sovereign immunity for lawsuits alleging Saudi government and royal involvement in charitable contributions that al Jurisdictional discovery was ordered to assess whether a Saudi Arabian bank’s U.S. contacts create p The court found Saudi princes’ charitable contributions insufficient to meet New York’s concerted

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court denies amendment to add additional Jane Doe plaintiffs in CVRA case

The passage discusses procedural arguments about adding parties to a civil rights case and does not reveal any new allegations, financial flows, or involvement of high‑profile officials. It offers no Petitioners seek to add Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 as parties but the court finds it unnecessary. Government argues Jane Doe 4 lacks standing because she was not known when a non‑prosecution agreeme T

1p

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