Rux v. Republic of Sudan

In 2000, the United States naval warship USS Cole was bombed in a suicide attack while the ship was docked in Yemen. American sailors were killed, and the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Ladin, claimed responsibility. Relatives of the killed American sailors (the relatives) (plaintiffs) sued the Republic of Sudan (Sudan) (defendant) for civil damages, asserting that the district court had subject-matter jurisdiction based on the terrorism exception to sovereign immunity. Sudan was a designated state sponsor of terrorism. The relatives alleged in several detailed paragraphs that Sudan and Sudanese officers in their official capacities had provided material support and resources to al-Qaeda and Bin Laden, knowing that there was a plan to attack the USS Cole. Sudan and its president, Omar Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir (al-Bashir), had multiple shared investments with Bin Laden, funded al-Qaeda’s operations, allowed operatives to safely enter and stay in the country, allowed training camps to operate, and gave tax breaks to al-Qaeda operatives. In addition, the Sudanese government allowed al-Qaeda to use its diplomatic pouch to send explosives outside of Sudan and allowed an al-Qaeda operative, al-Fadl, to ship four crates of explosives from Sudan to Yemen, where the bombing occurred. In May 2003, Sudan’s minister of foreign affairs publicly apologized for harboring and assisting terrorists. The relatives alleged that al-Qaeda could not have implemented its decade-long plan to attack Americans without the support of countries like Sudan. Sudan filed a motion to dismiss the relatives’ action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Sudan argued that the relatives had not shown that Sudan was a but-for cause of the terrorist attack. The district court denied the motion, and Sudan appealed.