Whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's terrorism exception extends jurisdiction to claims arising from a foreign state's material support for a terrorist attack that injures or disables, but does not kill, its victims

QUESTION PRESENTED The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s “terrorism exception” supplies federal courts with subjectmatter jurisdiction over claims seeking liability against a foreign state for its “act of * * * extrajudicial killing * * * or the provision of material support or resources for such an act.” 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(a)(1). Terrorists acting on behalf of Hamas committed two terrorist attacks in Israel: a shooting at a holy site near Hebron and a car-ramming at a bus stop in Jerusalem. Both attacks injured U.S. nationals. The victims of these attacks and their family members sued two of Hamas’s sponsors, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Syrian Arab Republic, invoking jurisdiction under the terrorism exception. Although the district court found jurisdiction, the D.C. Circuit reversed, holding that the terrorism exception does not apply to the provision of material support for attacks intended to kill but that result only in grievous injuries. Instead, the court of appeals held that jurisdiction turns on whether someone happens to have died in the attack. The question presented is: Whether the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act’s terrorism exception extends jurisdiction to claims arising from a foreign state’s material support for a terrorist attack that injures or disables, but does not kill, its victims.