Justices Allow Suit Against Austria on Art Seized by Nazis

June 7, 2004
By DAVID STOUT

WASHINGTON, June 7 - The Supreme Court ruled today that
United States courts have jurisdiction to hear lawsuits
involving art and other property stolen by the Nazis nearly
seven decades ago, a decision that some justices said could
affect American diplomacy.

The justices found, by a margin of 6 to 3, that an elderly
California woman's efforts to regain possession of
paintings once owned by her uncle, a sugar magnate and art
patron in Austria before World War II, can be resolved in
the United States despite a 1976 law that defines the terms
for suing foreign governments in the federal courts.

That law, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, provides
some exceptions to the general rule that foreign
governments are immune from suits. A technical but
all-important question was whether the act can be applied
retroactively.

Justice John Paul Stevens held for the majority that it
can. "We find clear evidence that Congress intended the act
to apply to pre-enactment conduct," he wrote.

Today's ruling does not address the merits of the suit
brought by Maria V. Altmann, who is in her late 80's and
has described the American court system as her last chance
in a decadeslong quest to retrieve the remains of the art
collection of her uncle, Ferdinand Bloch-Bauer. Rather, the
justices ruled that the case can at least proceed in the
federal courts.

At issue are six paintings by Gustav Klimt, including two
portraits of Mr. Bloch-Bauer's wife, Adele. The six works
are in the Austrian Gallery in Vienna and are said to be
worth more than $100 million.

Austria has maintained that the paintings were left to the
state and its museums under the will of Adele Bloch-Bauer,
who died in 1925. The fact that the Nazis had illegitimate
possession of them during World War II does not chance the
reality that they properly belong to Austria now, that
country argues.

Ms. Altmann disputes that version of events. She contends
that her aunt's wishes for the disposition of the paintings
never achieved the status of a formal bequest to the
government. Ferdinand Bloch-Bauer fled Vienna in 1938, at
the time of the German annexation of Austria, and died in
1945.

Ms. Altmann settled in California after the war and became
an American citizen. She turned to the federal courts after
learning that a suit in the Austrian courts would cost
nearly $2 million, since filing fees are based on a
percentage of the amount in dispute.

Today's ruling upheld a Federal District Court decision and
one by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit, in San Francisco, both of which had refused
Austria's motions to dismiss the case. Joining Justice
Stevens in the majority today in Austria v. Altmann, 03-13,
were Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, David H.
Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote a dissent joined by Chief
Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas.
The dissenters did not see the leeway that the majority
discerned on the retroactivity issue. Quoting from a court
ruling nearly 200 years ago, Justice Kennedy wrote, "It is
a principle in the English common law, as ancient as the
law itself, that a statute, even of the omnipotent
Parliament, is not to have a retrospective effect."

The dissenters said the majority's holding could resurrect
and bring into the courts issues supposedly resolved
"generations ago, including claims that have been the
subject of international negotiation and agreement."

The State Department can still ask the courts to dismiss
cases against foreign governments, but today's ruling
indicates that there is no certainty the dismissal motions
will be granted.

The full ramifications of today's ruling may not become
clear for some time, but it is sure to hearten plaintiffs
in other cases dealing with events from World War II.

Last June, for instance, a federal appeals case in New York
reinstated a suit by Holocaust survivors and their heirs
against the French national railroad for transporting
thousands of Jews and others to Nazi death camps. That
decision has been appealed to the Supreme Court.