Court dismisses tort claims alleging support for al‑Qaeda via front charities

Court dismisses tort claims alleging support for al‑Qaeda via front charities The passage discusses procedural rulings in a 9/11‑related MDL and critiques a judge’s reasoning about liability for indirect support of terrorism. It does not identify specific high‑profile defendants, financial transactions, or new evidence; it merely restates legal arguments and case law. Consequently, it offers limited investigative value, low controversy, and little novelty. Key insights: District court dismissed non‑federal plaintiffs’ intentional tort claims for lack of direct support allegations.; Judge Daniels’ reasoning expands liability to exclude indirect support via front charities, contrary to prior precedent.; The brief argues that material support can be indirect and still constitute liability under the ATA.