## Facts

- The United States indicted Frederick Schultz, a New York antiquities dealer, for conspiring to receive and deal in ancient Egyptian artifacts allegedly stolen in Egypt and sold in New York.
- The prosecution theory relied on Egyptian Law 117 of 1983, which defines certain “antiquities” and declares them to be public property owned by the Egyptian state.
- Based on that asserted state ownership, the government alleged that unauthorized removal and subsequent commerce in the artifacts constituted dealing in “stolen” property under the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA), 18 U.S.C. § 2315.
- Schultz was charged with one count of conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371, with the object offense being a violation of § 2315 involving foreign and interstate commerce in the antiquities.
- Schultz moved pretrial to dismiss the indictment, arguing the alleged conduct did not state an offense because the artifacts were not “stolen” within the meaning of § 2315.
- The district court held an evidentiary hearing and resolved the motion on the sufficiency of the indictment’s theory that Egyptian law created an ownership interest protected by the NSPA.

## Issues

1. Whether Egyptian Law 117 is an ownership (patrimony) law that can render unlawfully removed antiquities “stolen” for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 2315, rather than a mere export or licensing regulation.
2. Whether a foreign sovereign’s ownership interest created by a valid patrimony law constitutes “property” protected by the NSPA such that removal and trafficking can qualify as receiving “stolen” property.
3. Whether the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) impliedly displaced or limited use of the NSPA for prosecutions involving foreign cultural property.

## Decision

- The court denied Schultz’s motion to dismiss the indictment.
- The court held that Egyptian Law 117 operates as a true vesting of ownership in the Egyptian state, not merely an export-control or regulatory scheme.
- The court held that property owned by a foreign sovereign under a valid patrimony statute can be “stolen” within the meaning of the NSPA.
- The court rejected the argument that the CPIA provides an exclusive enforcement mechanism that bars NSPA prosecutions in this setting.

## Legal Principles

- A foreign patrimony statute that clearly and substantively vests ownership of defined cultural objects in the foreign state may establish a proprietary interest such that unauthorized removal and subsequent commerce can involve “stolen” property under 18 U.S.C. § 2315.
- The NSPA may protect a foreign government’s ownership rights when the foreign law asserts actual ownership, as distinct from regulating export or licensing.
- Absent clear congressional intent, the CPIA does not impliedly repeal or preclude application of the NSPA to trafficking in foreign state-owned cultural property.

## Conclusion

The court sustained an indictment charging conspiracy to violate the NSPA by receiving and dealing in Egyptian antiquities, reasoning that Egyptian Law 117 vested state ownership sufficient to treat unlawfully removed antiquities as “stolen” property and that the CPIA did not bar prosecution under § 2315.


United States v. Schultz, 178 F. Supp. 2d 445 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)