{
  "id": 123404,
  "title": "Sonia Sotomayor refuses to pause $655m judgment against Palestinian Authority over attack claims",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/04/sonia-sotomayor-refuses-to-pause-655m-judgment-against-palestinian",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-08-04T09:58:59.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Jerusalem Post",
    "slug": "jerusalem-post",
    "url": "https://www.jpost.com/international/article-904525"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "In a recent decision, US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined to halt a $655.5 million judgment against the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization. The court did not offer any explanation for its choice, and it did not forward the request to the entire court. This ruling permits the collection of the funds to proceed as the Palestinian organizations continue to prepare an appeal. However, Sotomayor's decision does not signify a resolution on the appeal itself.\n\nThe Palestinian entities had approached the court to suspend the judgment, contending that it ought not to have been reinstated following its prior reversal. They also cautioned that enforcing the award now could exacerbate the PA's financial crisis and impede essential services in the West Bank. The lawsuit was initiated by American victims and their families who were affected by shootings and bombings in and around Jerusalem between 2002 and 2004.\n\nIn 2015, a New York jury ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding $218.5 million in damages, which was subsequently tripled under US anti-terrorism law to the current amount. Congress enacted legislation to enable cases against the PA and PLO. Nonetheless, the initial judgment was overturned in 2016 by an appeals court, asserting that US courts lacked jurisdiction to hear the case against the PA and PLO at that time. Subsequently, Congress amended the law to facilitate American terrorism victims in bringing such cases.\n\nThe Supreme Court's unanimous agreement to maintain this law in 2025 prompted the appeals court to reinstate the original judgment in March. The Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization are anticipated to submit a request to the Supreme Court to determine whether a judgment that was previously overturned can be legally reinstated years later.",
  "summary": "US Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has refused to pause a $655 million judgment against the Palestinian Authority over attack claims. The judgment, which was reinstated by a US appeals court in March, relates to a lawsuit filed by Americans killed or wounded in attacks in Israel in the early 2000s. The Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority had asked the Supreme Court to pause payment as they appeal the verdict, citing concerns that paying the judgment could destabilize government services in the West Bank.\n\nThe lawsuit was brought under the Anti-Terrorism Act and claims that the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization were responsible for the attacks, which killed 33 people and wounded hundreds more. The Supreme Court had previously ruled in favor of the victims and their families, reviving two cases in 2025. According to the Associated Press, Sotomayor's order allows efforts to collect the money to continue while the Palestinian Authority and PLO prepare another appeal.\n\nThe decision does not mean the Supreme Court has ruled on that appeal itself, as reported by the Jerusalem Post. The case is part of a long-running legal battle between the Palestinian Authority and the families of the victims of the attacks.",
  "key_points": [
    "Palestinian entities seek to halt judgment, citing financial crisis concerns.",
    "Judgment reinstated in March 2025 after Supreme Court's unanimous decision."
  ],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}