Xxx united states

Rated 3.89/5 based on 988 customer reviews

Heinous acts of terror breached the shores of the Nation on September 11, 2001. The district court then permitted Appellees to amend their claims to reflect their perfected lien on the defendant funds.

Approximately 3,000 innocents lost their lives, affecting countless other persons, communities, and businesses.

Additionally, Appellees argued that the “notwithstanding” clause supersedes the procedural oddities of civil forfeiture law.

In its view, Appellees lacked the requisite ownership and legal interest in the defendant funds to participate in the forfeiture proceedings because their judgment against al Qaeda was not final and because they secured no lien against the defendant funds. Labeling Appellees “general unsecured creditor[s],” the district court found that they could not establish their interest in the property to be forfeited.

But six months before the Southern District of New York had entered final judgment in Appellees' favor, and more than two years before the Northern District of Illinois issued its decision in favor of Appellees, OFAC granted a license to the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) on July 8, 2011. Four days after OFAC granted the license, the Northern District of Illinois granted the United States' application for warrants of arrest in rem for the defendant funds.

The Northern District of Illinois recognized the existence of the license in its decision (it was stipulated by all parties to be an undisputed fact), but it nonetheless treated the funds as if they remained blocked.

The United States moved to certify the district court's decision for interlocutory appeal.

“[I]t is undisputed,” the district court noted, “that the assets in question are ‘blocked,’ a status that is essential for a TRIA claim to go forward; the government labeled the assets as such in its complaint.” United States v.

Leave a Reply