The plaintiffs obtained court orders preventing the transfer of funds from the account in 2008 and initiated their lawsuit in 2010. The plaintiffs, in the case had initially obtained judgments against Iran for its role in supporting state-sponsored terrorism, particularly the 1983 Beirut barracks bombings and 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, and sought execution against a bank account in New York held, through European intermediaries, on behalf of Bank Markazi, the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran. _ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case that found that a law which only applied to a specific case, identified by docket number, and eliminated all of the defenses one party had raised does not violate the separation of powers in the United States Constitution between the legislative ( Congress) and judicial branches of government. Ginsburg, joined by Kennedy, Breyer, Alito, Kagan Thomas (all but Part II–C)īank Markazi v. Islamic Republic of Iran, et al., 758 F.3d 185 ( 2nd Cir., 2014) : 48Ī law that only applied to a specific case, identified by docket number, and eliminated all of the defenses one party had raised did not violate the separation of powers in the United States Constitution between the legislative (Congress) and judicial branches of government since it pertained to the immunity of assets of a foreign state, it was also justified as a valid exercise of Congress' authority in foreign policy mattersĬhief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Anthony Kennedy NY, July 9, 2013) : 60 affirmed, Peterson, et al. Central Bank of Iran, Banca UBAE, Citibank, and Clearstream Banking, No. Islamic Republic of Iran, Bank Markazi a.k.a.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |