The fact that we’ve even allowed Iran to have standing in this regard is outrageous. It’s taken over 30 years, and Congress finally had to intervene. This is a good ruling, 6-2, which rejected the notion that a congressional act on this issue somehow violated the separation of powers.

The 2 dissenters? John Roberts and Sonia Sotomayor.

At this point, with two serious questionable ruling from Roberts, including the inexplicable ObamaCare mandate ruling, it’s clear we must consider Roberts as part of the hardcore liberal framework on the court. As when the onservative ideal is required, he’s AWOL. Another reminder of the importance of the election.

The amount in question here is a $2.65 billion dollar judgment for the plaintiffs against Iran in 2007. Remember the little extra $1.7 billion we paid Iran with taxpayer funds last year? The Iranians said it was ransom, many others said it was related to this court case and Obama’s desire to supposedly support the families claims, while then making is painless for Iran by sending that mass murdering terrorist regime almost $2 billion using a pretext.

Via Reuters.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that almost $2 billion in frozen Iranian assets must be turned over to American families of people killed in the 1983 bombing of a U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut and other attacks blamed on Iran.

The court’s 6-2 ruling dealt a setback to Iran’s central bank, finding that the U.S. Congress did not usurp the authority of American courts by passing a 2012 law stating that the frozen funds should go toward satisfying a $2.65 billion judgment won by the families against Iran in U.S. federal court in 2007.

Bank Markazi had challenged a 2014 ruling by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the money, held in a Citibank trust account in New York, should be handed over to the American plaintiffs.

The ruling, written by liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said the U.S. Congress did not violate the separation of powers principle enshrined in the U.S. Constitution that gives specific authority to the government’s executive, legislative and judicial branches…

Ginsburg rejected the notion that the law infringed upon the role of courts by indicating how a case should be decided, saying that it instead “directs courts to apply a new legal standard to undisputed facts.” It was left to the courts to determine how that standard should be implemented, she said.

The lawsuit was brought by more than 1,000 Americans who have waged a long legal battle seeking compensation for attacks they say Iran orchestrated. Congress inserted itself into the dispute by passing the law to help the American plaintiffs obtain the Iranian funds.

The plaintiffs accused Iran of providing material support to Hezbollah, the Iran-backed Shi’ite Islamist political and military group responsible for the 1983 truck bomb attack at the Marine compound in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. service members…

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for himself and Justice Sonia Sotomayor in dissent, said he thought the law passed by Congress relating to the case violated the U.S. constitutional separation of powers.

“No less than if it had passed a law saying ‘respondents win,’ Congress has decided this case by enacting a bespoke statute tailored to this case that resolves the parties’ specific legal disputes to guarantee respondents victory,” Roberts said.


This section is for comments from's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
1 Comment | Leave a comment
  1. Shifra says:

    It’s very clear that Roberts thinks it’s much more important to get invitations to all the “cool” DC cocktail parties, than to uphold the Constitution.

You must be logged in to post a comment.