Blom Bank Sal v. Honickman
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 5, 2025 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Decided
- June 5, 2025
- Term
- October Term 2024
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Thomas
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
PRELIMINARY PRINT Volume 605 U. S. Part 1 Pages 204–222 OFFICIAL REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT June 5, 2025 Page Proof Pending Publication REBECCA A. WOMELDORF reporter of decisions NOTICE: This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before the bound volume is published. Users are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors. Syllabus BLOM BANK SAL v. HONICKMAN et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the second circuit No. 23–1259. Argued March 3, 2025—Decided June 5, 2025 Plaintiffs, who are victims and families of victims of terrorist attacks car- ried out by Hamas between 2001 and 2003, sued BLOM Bank SAL under the Anti-Terrorism Act for allegedly aiding and abetting the attacks by providing fnancial services to Hamas-affliated customers. BLOM argued that the complaint failed to state a claim, and plaintiffs repeat- edly affrmed they would not seek to amend their complaint if it were dismissed. The District Court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, fnding that plaintiffs had not adequately alleged that BLOM had the requisite general awareness for aiding-and-abetting liability. The court denied leave to amend because plaintiffs had declined several opportuni- ties to amend and failed to identify additional facts…
Excerpt of a 41,459-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.