Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Bank Markazi v. Peterson

578 U.S. 212, 136 S. Ct. 1310 (2016)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

Bank Markazi v. Peterson

United States Supreme Court

578 U.S. 212, 136 S. Ct. 1310 (2016)

Facts

Beginning in 1976, federal law allowed American nationals to sue foreign state sponsors of terrorism in United States courts to recover money damages for personal injury or death caused by terrorist acts. To help plaintiffs enforce their judgments against the foreign states, Congress authorized the execution of judgments against terrorist parties’ so-called blocked assets (i.e., assets seized by the executive branch for disposal in furtherance of the United States’ foreign-relations and national-security interests). In February of 2012, President Obama issued an executive order blocking all United States property and property interests held by Iranian financial institutions, including the Central Bank of Iran, Bank Markazi (defendant). Congress then passed 22 U.S.C. § 8772, which provided that upon a sufficient evidentiary showing that Iran owned the bank’s assets, the assets were subject to execution to satisfy terrorism judgments awarded against Iran. Section 8772(b) specified that financial assets that had been identified and restrained in Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran, a then-pending action in federal district court in New York, were available for execution. The Peterson action involved the enforcement of over 1,000 terrorism judgments obtained against Iran by Diane Peterson and others (plaintiffs). To effectuate the enforcement, the district court restrained $1.75 billion in assets held by Bank Markazi in a New York bank account. Following the enactment of § 8772, the district court ordered the turnover of the assets. Bank Markazi objected, arguing that § 8772 violated separation-of-powers principles because Congress had compelled the court to reach a predetermined outcome in the litigation. The district court rejected Bank Markazi’s argument, and the appellate court affirmed the asset turnover. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Ginsburg, J.)

Dissent (Roberts, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership