## Facts

- Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) kidnapped U.S. civilians Jack Armstrong and Jack Hensley in Iraq, held them hostage, and ultimately beheaded them; the killings were videotaped and broadcast publicly.
- Plaintiffs were the victims’ close family members: Francis Gates (Armstrong’s mother), Jan Smith (Armstrong’s sister), Pati Hensley (Hensley’s widow), and Sara Hensley (Hensley’s minor daughter).
- Plaintiffs sued the Syrian Arab Republic, Syria’s president Bashar al‑Assad, Syria’s Military Intelligence, and Military Intelligence’s director (General Asif Shawkat).
- Plaintiffs alleged Syria and its officials provided “material support or resources” to AQI and its leader, including recruitment, training, transportation, sanctuary, and financial assistance, while knowing of AQI’s violent terrorist acts.
- The complaint was filed in 2006 under the FSIA’s former terrorism exception, 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(7), along with state-law tort claims.
- After Congress enacted 28 U.S.C. § 1605A through the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008, plaintiffs sought to proceed under § 1605A(c), which creates a federal cause of action and lists recoverable damages (economic damages, solatium, pain and suffering, and punitive damages).
- None of the defendants appeared or answered. The court proceeded under FSIA default procedures, requiring plaintiffs to prove liability and damages with evidence acceptable to the court.
- The court held a multi-day evidentiary hearing at which plaintiffs presented documentary and testimonial evidence (including expert testimony) regarding Syria’s alleged support for AQI and the connection between that support and the murders.
- Based on the record, the court assessed whether Syria’s conduct met the statutory standards for liability under the FSIA terrorism exception and what damages were authorized under § 1605A(c).

## Issues

1. Whether § 1605A(c) provides a direct federal cause of action permitting U.S. nationals (and certain relatives) to sue a foreign state for terrorism-related injuries and deaths.
2. Whether, after enactment of § 1605A(c), plaintiffs may continue to pursue state-law tort claims against the foreign state in the same action, or whether those state-law claims should be dismissed.
3. Whether the evidence established that Syria provided “material support or resources” to AQI and that such support was a legal cause of the kidnappings, torture, and murders of Armstrong and Hensley, sufficient to impose liability under the FSIA terrorism exception.
4. Whether § 1605A(c) authorizes punitive damages against a foreign state (as opposed to the former regime in which punitive damages were barred against foreign states under § 1606).
5. What damages were supported by the evidence for (a) the estates’ economic losses and the victims’ pain and suffering, and (b) the family members’ solatium damages.

## Decision

- The court entered default judgment against Syria under 28 U.S.C. § 1608(e) after finding plaintiffs established their claims by evidence satisfactory to the court.
- The court treated the action as proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c), concluding Congress created a federal private right of action for terrorism-related claims against state sponsors of terrorism and specified the categories of recoverable damages.
- The court dismissed plaintiffs’ state-law claims, reasoning that § 1605A(c) supplies the governing source of liability and damages against a foreign state in this setting.
- On liability, the court found the record supported that Syria, acting through its government apparatus (including military intelligence), provided material support to AQI and that this support contributed to the terrorist acts that resulted in Armstrong’s and Hensley’s deaths.
- The court awarded damages authorized by § 1605A(c), totaling $412,909,587.00, including:
  - Economic damages to each estate,
  - Pain-and-suffering damages to each estate,
  - Solatium damages to each set of close relatives, and
  - Punitive damages against Syria to punish and deter sponsorship of terrorism.

## Legal Principles

- A foreign state is immune from suit in U.S. courts unless an FSIA exception applies; when an exception applies, the court may exercise jurisdiction and decide liability and damages as authorized by statute.
- Under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c), Congress created a federal cause of action against foreign states designated as sponsors of terrorism, and it identified recoverable damages as economic damages, solatium, pain and suffering, and punitive damages.
- In FSIA cases, a foreign state’s default does not end the court’s inquiry; § 1608(e) requires the plaintiff to prove the claim and entitlement to relief with evidence the court finds satisfactory.
- “Material support or resources” for terrorist activity can include facilitation such as recruitment, training, transport, sanctuary, and funding; liability requires a showing that such support is connected to the terrorist harm in a legally sufficient way.
- Under § 1605A(c), punitive damages may be imposed against a foreign state for state-sponsored terrorism, unlike the earlier approach in which punitive damages were generally barred against foreign states under § 1606.
- Damages in FSIA terrorism cases must be supported by record evidence, and courts may award estate-based damages (economic loss and the decedent’s pain and suffering) as well as family-member damages (solatium) consistent with § 1605A(c).

## Conclusion

The district court entered a terrorism-related default judgment under FSIA § 1605A(c), holding that the victims’ relatives could sue Syria directly under a federal cause of action, dismissing state-law claims, finding Syria liable for providing material support to AQI connected to the beheadings of Armstrong and Hensley, and awarding economic, solatium, pain-and-suffering, and punitive damages totaling $412,909,587.00.


Gates v. Syrian Arab Republic, 580 F. Supp. 2d 53 (2008)