Hungary v. Simon
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Hungary v. Simon and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Hungary v. Simon.
In Hungary v. Simon, the Supreme Court addressed the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's expropriation exception, focusing on whether commingling of funds satisfies the commercial nexus requirement. The Court ruled that merely alleging commingling does not meet this requirement, emphasizing the need for plaintiffs to trace specific expropriated property or its proceeds to the United States. This decision vacated and remanded the lower court's ruling.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Hungary v. Simon.
The Court held that alleging commingling of funds alone cannot satisfy the commercial nexus requirement of the FSIA's expropriation exception.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Hungary v. Simon. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why State Sovereign Immunity is relevant to Hungary v. Simon
The case involves the application of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which is directly related to the concept of sovereign immunity.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) provides foreign states with presumptive immunity from suit in the United States.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Hungary v. Simon
The Court's decision involves interpreting the FSIA and determining the applicability of its exceptions, which is an exercise of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: Alleging commingling of funds alone cannot satisfy the commercial nexus requirement of the FSIA's expropriation exception.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Hungary v. Simon
The case discusses the requirements for plaintiffs to trace property under the FSIA, which relates to procedural fairness in legal claims.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Plaintiffs must plead some facts that enable the reasonable tracing of the property to the United States.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Hungary v. Simon that support the summary and concepts above.
Alleging commingling of funds alone cannot satisfy the commercial nexus requirement of the FSIA's expropriation exception.
Plaintiffs must still plausibly allege that the specific proceeds from their property have the required commercial connection to the United States.
The FSIA's text requiring identification of specific property, combined with the facts of Sabbatino, counsels against respondents' expansive commingling theory.
