141 S. Ct. 703 (2021)
Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp is a landmark U.S.
Does the FSIA's expropriation exception, 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(3), allow U.S. courts to exercise jurisdiction over claims that a foreign state took property from its own nationals as part of a genocidal campaign?
Under the FSIA, foreign states are presumptively immune from suit in U.S. courts unless a specific statutory exception applies. The expropriation exception removes immunity in cases where "rights in property taken in violation of international law are in issue" and certain commercial-nexus requirements are met. Interpreted in light of its text, structure, and historical context, the phrase "taken in violation of international law" in § 1605(a)(3) refers to the international law of expropriation, which traditionally concerns a sovereign's taking of property from aliens. The "domestic takings" rule therefore applies: a sovereign's taking of property from its own nationals, even if wrongful, is not a violation of the international law of expropriation. Allegations that the taking was part of genocide do not convert a domestic taking into an international law violation within the meaning of the FSIA's property-based exception.
No. The FSIA's expropriation exception does not apply to claims that a foreign sovereign took property from its own nationals, even when the taking is alleged to be part of genocide. The Court reversed the judgment of the D.C. Circuit and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.
Philipp clarifies that the FSIA's expropriation exception is narrowly tethered to the international law of expropriation and does not incorporate broader human-rights norms such as genocide. For litigators, it underscores that sovereign immunity questions turn on the FSIA's text and that creative reframing of claims will not expand exceptions beyond Congress's design. For scholars and students, it is a significant example of textualist statutory interpretation in the foreign-relations arena and a reminder that morally compelling claims may still be barred by jurisdictional limits. Practically, Philipp constrains Holocaust-era restitution suits against foreign states in U.S. courts unless plaintiffs can show takings of aliens (or satisfy some other FSIA exception and nexus requirements), channeling many such disputes back to foreign or diplomatic fora.