PA ordered to pay $655.5 million to Intifada victims after NY Appeals Court reinstates prior ruling

Lead

A US federal appeals court has reinstated a $655.5 million judgment against the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority (PA), ordering them to pay damages to victims of terrorism from the Second Intifada. The decision, issued by the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, revives a 2015 verdict that had been overturned a decade ago on jurisdictional grounds.

Coverage Comparison

The ruling was reported by both the Jerusalem Post and the South China Morning Post, with slightly different emphases. The Jerusalem Post framed the story around the victims and the Palestinian Authority's policies, while the South China Morning Post focused on the legal process and the Supreme Court's role. Both outlets confirmed the core facts: the reinstatement of the $655.5 million judgment, the involvement of the 2nd Circuit, and the connection to a recent Supreme Court ruling.

Key Claims

• The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated a 2015 judgment ordering the PLO and PA to pay $655.5 million in damages to victims of terrorism. This was reported by both the Jerusalem Post and the South China Morning Post.
• The original case, Sokolow v. Palestinian Authority, was filed in 2004 by families of victims of the Second Intifada. This detail was provided by the Jerusalem Post.
• The case was based on the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) of 1992, according to the Jerusalem Post.
• The US Supreme Court in May 2025 determined that US courts have jurisdiction to hear international terrorism claims against the Palestinian Authority. This was reported by the Jerusalem Post.
• The Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (PSJVTA) of 2019 established that certain conduct by foreign entities may be deemed consent to US court jurisdiction. This was mentioned by the Jerusalem Post.
• The 2nd Circuit's decision came in light of a Supreme Court ruling last June upholding the 2019 law. This was reported by the South China Morning Post.
• The appeals court had previously tossed out the verdict in 2016, and the Supreme Court had declined to review it in 2018. This was noted by the Jerusalem Post.

Perspectives

The Jerusalem Post's coverage highlighted the role of Shurat Hadin – Israel Law Center, which led the legal effort, and emphasized the PA's 'pay for slay' policy as a central argument for liability. The tone was supportive of the victims and critical of the Palestinian Authority.

The South China Morning Post's coverage was more neutral, focusing on the legal reasoning and quoting lawyers for the plaintiffs. It noted that the appeals court concluded the reinstatement was consistent with the Supreme Court's decision, and included comments from lawyers Kent Yalowitz and Nitsana Darshan-Leitner expressing relief and satisfaction after years of litigation.

Context and Corrections

The case has a long procedural history. The original 2015 judgment was overturned by the 2nd Circuit in 2016, and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case in 2018. The legal landscape changed with the passage of the PSJVTA in 2019, which the Supreme Court upheld in a ruling last June. That ruling paved the way for the reinstatement of the judgment, which the appeals court issued on March 30, 2026.

Both outlets reported the judgment amount as $655.5 million, though the South China Morning Post rounded it to US$656 million. The discrepancy is minor and likely due to rounding.