1 28 U.S.C. §§1330, 1602-1611 (2000).

2 The FSIA terrorist-state exception is codified at 28 U.S.C. §1605(a) (7). States are designated as “terrorist” under the Export Administration Act of 1961 §6( J), 50 U.S.C. App. §2405 (J) (2000), or under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, §620A, 22 U.S.C. §2371 (2000).

3 See, e.g., Peterson v. Iran, 264 F.Supp.2d 46 (D.D.C. 2003).

4 For a survey of cases involving the terrorist-state exception during 1999-2001, as well as of the legislative changes in 1998 and 2000, see SEAN D. MURPHY, UNITED STATES PRACTICE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: 1999-2001, 70-86 (2002).

5 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for 1999, Pub. L. No. 105-277,112 Stat. 2681 (1998). This statute added 28 U.S.C. §1610(f) (2000) and modified 28 U.S.C. §1606 (2000), thereby allowing plaintiffs to attach and execute judgments against any property of a terrorist state with respect to which financial transactions are prohibited or regulated under U.S. blocking statutes. President Clinton initially sought to waive this abrogation of foreign sovereign immunity in the national interest, but at least one lower court found the waiver to be invalid. See Alejandre v. Cuba, 42 F.Supp.2d 1317 (S.D. Fla. 1999), vacated on other grounds, 183 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 1999). Thereafter, as part of the 2000 legislation, infranote 6, the president's ability to waive §1610(f) in the national interest was made clear. See28 U.S.C. §1610(f) (3) (2000). President Clinton subsequently did exercise that waiver. See Presidential Determination 2001-03,3 C.F.R. 405 (2001). As a result, the 2002 legislation, infra note 7, sought to provide plaintiffs a further opportunity to attach and execute against such assets.

6 Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-386, §2002,114 Stat. 1464,1541-43 (2000) [hereinafter VTVPA]. This statute made available blocked assets of Cuba for the purposes of paying certain outstandingjudgments against Cuba. Further, the statute provided that specific plaintiffs with judgments against Iran could be paid out of funds from the U.S. Treasury supplemented by a small portion of blocked Iranian funds. Plaintiffs with judgments against Iran who were not identified in the legislation, however, could not receive payment under the program, nor could plaintiffs with judgments against other terrorist states.

7 Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-297,116 Stat. 2322 (2002) [hereinafter TRIA]. In addition to making specific blocked assets available for the execution of judgments, this statute also made additional judgment holders eligible for payments from the U.S. Treasury under the system set up by the VTVPA.

8 TRIA§201(a), 116 Stat, at 2337 (emphasis added).

9 50 U.S.C. App. §5(b) (2000).

10 50 U.S.C. §§1701, 1702 (2000).

11 TRIA §201 (d)(2)(B), 116 Stat, at 2339-40.

12 Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 184 F.Supp.2d 13 (D.D.C. 2002).

13 22 U.S.C. §§2751-2796(d) (2000).

14 Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 274 F.Supp.2d 53, 58 (D.D.C. Jul. 22, 2003).

15 See Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-386, §2002 (b) (2), 114 Stat. 1464, 1542 (2000).

16 Flatowv. Islamic Republic of Iran, 76F.Supp.2d 16,22-23 (D.D.C. 1999). The funds in this account were held for longer-term property renovation, as opposed to immediate disbursals for maintenance and repairs.

17 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Apr. 18, 1961, Art. 45, 23 UST 3227, 3248, 500 UNTS 95, 122. A comparable provision exists for consulates. See Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Apr. 24, 1963, Art. 27, 21 UST 77, 95, 596 UNTS 261, 284.

18 Weinstein, 274 F.Supp.2d at 60-61. By contrast, a court in the same circuit found that bank accounts held in the name of the former Iraqi embassy in the United States could be attached under the TRIA since the funds “were used primarily (if not exclusively) for commercial, rather than diplomatic purposes.” Hill v. Iraq, No. Civ. 99-3346, 2001 WL 21057173 (D.D.C. Mar. 11, 2003). In that case, the court considered whether the accounts were immune from execution under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, but decided that the “notwithstanding any other provision of law” language found in the TRIA “by its plain terms … overrides any immunity from execution that blocked Iraqi property might otherwise enjoy.” Id. at *2.

19 Weinstein, No. Civ. 00-2601, slip op. at 14.

20 Hegna v. Iran, No. Civ. 00-0716, slip. op. (D.D.C.Jan. 22, 2001).

21 Hegna v. Iran, No. Civ. 03-2050, 2003 WL 22050777, at *2 (D. Md. Aug. 25, 2003).

22 Id. (citations and footnote omitted).

23 Exec. Order No. 12,722, 3 C.F.R. 294 (1991).

24 Exec. Order No. 13,290,68 Fed. Reg. 14,307 (Mar. 20,2003). This measure was taken pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. §§1701-1707 (2000). The USA Patriot Act had amended that act in order to empower the president to confiscate and vest in the United States the assets of foreign states “when the United States is engaged in armed hostilities or has been attacked by a foreign country or foreign nationals.” See USA Patriot Act §106, Pub. L. No. 107-56,115 Stat. 271,277-78 (2001) (codified at 50 U.S.C. §1702 (a) (1) ( Q ) .

25 Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act § 1503, Pub. L. No. 108-11,117 Stat. 559 (Apr. 16,2003).

26 Pres. Determination No. 2003-23, 68 Fed. Reg. 26,459 (May 16, 2003). The president subsequently declared that “such provisions of law… include, but are not limited to, 28 U.S.C. 1605(a) (7), 28 U.S.C. 1610, and section 201 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act.” Message to Congress Reporting the Declaration of a National Emergency with Respect to the Development Fund for Iraq, 39 WEEKLY COMP. PRES. Doc. 647, 647-48 (May 22, 2003).

27 Acree v. Iraq, 271 F.Supp.2d 179, 220-24 (D.D.C. 2003).

28 See Some Iraqi Assets Set Aside for Ex-POWs, WASH. POST, July 20, 2003, at Al 0.

29 Acree v. Snow, No. Civ. 03-1549, 2003 WL 21754983, at *1.

30 Id. at *2.

31 United States’ Opposition to Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal at 1 (July 31, 2003), Acree v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, No. 03-5195 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 4, 2003). The U.S. government attached to its pleading a series of declarations by U.S. officials testifying to the importance of these funds for the reconstruction effort in Iraq. For example, Paul Bremer, presidential envoy to Iraq, declared that “the United States has an urgent and critical national security need to make use of vested Iraqi funds as soon as possible for humanitarian assistance and reconstruction efforts in Iraq.” Declaration of L. Paul Bremer, III, Administrator, Coalition Provisional Authority at para. 18 (July 23, 2003), attached to United States’ Opposition to Appellants’ Motion for an Emergency Stay (Aug. 29, 2003), Acree v. Snow, No. 03-5195 (D.C. Cir.); see also Declaration of the Hon. Dov S. Zakheim, Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer (July 31,2003), id.; Declaration of Mary Tomkey, Assistant Deputy Comptroller (Program/Budget) Office of the Under-Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (Aug. 20, 2003), id.

32 United States’ Motion to Intervene and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion to Intervene at 3-5 (July 21, 2003), Acree v. Iraq, No. Civ. 02-632, 2003 WL 21872372 (D.D.C. Aug. 6, 2003).

33 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of the United States’ Motion Under FRCP 59 (e) to Vacate Judgment (July 23, 2003), Acree v. Iraq, 2003 WL 21872372.

34 Id. at 4.

35 Id. at 8-10 (citations omitted).

36 Acree v. Iraq, 2003 WL 21872372, at *2-3.

37 Id. at *3-4.

38 Id. at *4.

39 Id. at *5.

40 Acree v. Snow, 2003 WL 22335011 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 7, 2003).

41 See White House Press Release on Remarks by President After Meeting with Members of the Congressional Conference Committee on Energy Legislation (Sept. 17, 2003), at <http://www.whitehouse.gov>.

42 Smith ex rel Smith v. Afghanistan, 262 F.Supp.2d 217, 228-32 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).

43 Id. at 240-41.

44 See Defendant Snow's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order (July 31, 2003), Smith v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, No. Civ. 03-5658, 2003 WL 22103452 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 11, 2003).

45 Smith v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 2003 WL 22103452, at *7-8.

46 Id. at *4.

47 Smith v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, No. 03-6195, 2003 WL 22272577 (2d Cir. Oct. 3, 2003).

48 Testimony of U.S. Department of State Legal Adviser William H. Taft IV on S. 1275, Benefits for Victims of International Terrorism Act, Before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, at 7-12 (July 17, 2003) (on file atGWU).

49 Benefits for Victims of International Terrorism Act of 2003, S. 1275, 108th Cong., §14 (2003).

50 Id. §§2, 6.

51 Id. §4.

52 Id. §7(a). Public safety officers’ death benefits are paid pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§3796-3796d-7 (2000).

53 Benefits for Victims of International Terrorism Act §7(b).

54 Id. §§10-11.