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

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, but it does identify a potential avenue for litigation against unnamed defendants alleged to have materially supported al‑Qaeda. The lead is moderately useful for investigators tracking civil accountability efforts, but offers limited novelty or high‑level power linkage. Key insights: 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‑limitations grounds.; Argument that claims should be timely under Pennsylvania and Virginia statutes, not New York law.