Amicus Curiae Brief — David Cassirer, et al., Petitioners v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Foundation

No. 24-652

In the Supreme Court of the United States

DAVID CASSIRER, et al.,

v.

Petitioners,

THYSSEN-BORNEMISZA COLLECTION FOUNDATION,

Respondent.

On Petition For A Writ of Certiorari

To The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Amici Curiae Brief of The 1939 Society,

Bet Tzedek, Center the Study of Law &

Genocide, Loyola Justice for Atrocities Clinic,

Simon Wiesenthal Center, Jewish Federations

of North America, American Jewish

Committee, Holocaust Survivors Foundation

USA, ART ASHES, and Stand With Us

In Support of Petitioners

BENJAMIN G. SHATZ*

PROF. MICHAEL J.

*Counsel of Record

BAZYLER

ANDREW BESHAI

OF COUNSEL

ALC LAWYERS

MANATT, PHELPS

& PHILLIPS, LLP

303 N. Glenoaks Blvd.,

2049 Century Park East,

Suite 200

Suite 1700

Burbank, CA 91502

Los Angeles, CA 90067 mbazyler@alclawyers.com

BShatz@Manatt.com

(310) 926-0149

(310) 312-4000

(Additional counsel information on inside cover)

(Counsel information continued from front cover)

STANLEY W. LEVY

FOUNDING NATIONAL DIRECTOR

BET TZEDEK’S HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

JUSTICE NETWORK

10281 Cresta Dr.

Los Angeles, CA 90064

STANLEY GOLDMAN

FOUNDING DIRECTOR

CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LAW AND GENOCIDE

LMU Loyola Law School

919 Albany Street

Los Angeles, CA 90015

RAJIKA L. SHAH

DIRECTOR

LOYOLA JUSTICE FOR ATROCITIES CLINIC

LMU Loyola Law School

919 Albany Street

Los Angeles, CA 90015

Counsel for Amici Curiae The 1939 Society,

Bet Tzedek, Center for the Study of Law and

Genocide, Loyola Justice for Atrocities Clinic et al.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE ................................... 1

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ............................ 1

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ................................ 8

ARGUMENT: THE DECISION BELOW

CONTRAVENES THE EXPRESS

INTENT OF CALIFORNIA, THE

UNITED STATES, AND THE

INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ............. 8

I.

This Court directed that California

choice of law rules control, and new

California Code of Civil Procedure

§ 338(c)(6) mandates that California

substantive law apply in this case ............... 9

II.

The legal and moral imperatives

align under California Law. ......................... 9

CONCLUSION ...................................................... 16

ii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES

Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection

Foundation,

89 F.4th 1226 (9th Cir. 2024) ....................... 9, 16

Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection

Foundation,

107 F.4th 882 (9th Cir. 2024) ........................... 10

Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection

Foundation,

596 U.S. 107 (2022)........................................... 10

Grunfeder v. Heckler,

748 F.2d 503 (9th Cir. 1984) .............................. 3

Republic of Austria v. Altmann,

541 U.S. 677 (2004)............................................. 3

Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum,

897 F.3d 1141 (9th Cir. 2018),

No. 18-1057 (U.S. 2019) ................................ 3, 12

STATUTES & LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

28 U.S.C. § 1606 ..................................................... 11

Holocaust Victims Redress Act, PL 105-158,

112 Stat 15. (Feb. 13, 1998).............................. 14

Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act

S. Rep. 114-394 (Dec. 6, 2016) .....................11, 14

Terezin Declaration on Holocaust Era Assets

and Related Issues (June 30, 2009) ............14, 15

iii

Washington Conference Principles on NaziConfiscated Art, U.S. Dep’t of State

(Dec. 3, 1998) ...............................................14, 15

Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 338(c)(6) ....................9, 11, 12

Cal. Assem. Bill 2867, 2024-2025 Reg. Sess.

(Cal. 2024) §§ 1(b), (e) (f), (k) .......................12, 16

SECONDARY SOURCES

Michael Bazyler, Holocaust, Genocide and

the Law: A Quest for Justice in a PostHolocaust World

(Oxford Univ. Press 2016) .................................. 2

Stanley Goldman, Left to the Mercy of a Rude

Stream: The Bargain That Broke Adolf

Hitler and Saved My Mother

(Potomac Books 2018) ......................................... 3

Robert H. Jackson, Opening Statement at

The Int’l Military Tribunal

(Nov. 21, 1945) .................................................. 13

Sam Jones, Spain Passes Law to Bring

‘Justice’ to Franco-Era Victims,

The Guardian (Oct. 5, 2022) ............................. 16

1

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE

Amici The 1939 Society, Bet Tzedek, Center for

the Study of Law and Genocide at LMU Loyola Law

School, Loyola Justice for Atrocities Clinic, Simon

Wiesenthal Center, Jewish Federations of North

America, American Jewish Committee, Holocaust

Survivors Foundation USA, ART ASHES, and

Stand With Us submit this brief supporting

Petitioners David Cassier et al. 1

INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE

The 1939 Society, formed in 1952 as The 1939

Club, is one of the oldest and largest organizations

of Holocaust survivors in the United States. Its

members and officers have included Jews that

appeared on Schindler’s list, including former

president Paul Page, a survivor of Schindler’s

factory who convinced Thomas Keneally to write

the book Schindler’s List and Steven Spielberg to

make the film based on it. In 1978, the organization

created the very first chair in Holocaust studies in

the United States at UCLA (now called The 1939

Society Samuel Goetz Chair in Holocaust Studies,

named after one of our former presidents who

pioneered Holocaust education in the United

States). Like tens of thousands of other Holocaust

survivors, Page died while awaiting some measure

of compensation for the wrongs he suffered.

1 No counsel for a party authored this brief in whole or in part.

No person or entity other than Amici, their members, or

counsel made a monetary contribution for preparation or

submission of this brief. Counsel of record for all parties

received timely notice of this amicus brief.

2

With all the original members now deceased,

and the remaining survivors in their golden years,

the Society now consists of children and

grandchildren of survivors and their supporters.

Its primary mission is to develop Holocaust

remembrance and education, and counter

increasing Holocaust denialism.

Michael Bazyler, Professor of Law and The 1939

Society Law Scholar in Holocaust and Human

Rights Studies at Chapman University School of

Law, is a leading authority on the use of American

and European courts to redress genocide and other

historical wrongs. His book Holocaust, Genocide

and the Law: A Quest for Justice in a PostHolocaust World (Oxford Univ. Press 2016) is a

winner of the 2016 National Jewish Book Award.

Bet Tzedek (Hebrew for “House of Justice”),

located in Los Angeles, California, is a nonprofit

public interest law firm founded in 1974 to achieve

full and equal access to justice for all vulnerable

members of its community, and is an

internationally recognized force in poverty law.

Bet Tzedek is widely respected for its expertise on

Holocaust reparations and has represented over

5,000 survivors and their families in reparations

claims, free of charge. Bet Tzedek’s Holocaust

Survivors Justice Network, a national coalition of

law firms, corporate legal departments and Jewish

social services agencies that was assembled to

provide vital legal aid to Holocaust survivors,

received the ABA Pro Bono Publico award.

3

Bet Tzedek has also litigated various Holocaustera restitution cases, including the landmark

Grunfeder v. Heckler, 748 F.2d 503 (9th Cir. 1984),

and has been amicus in many Nazi looted art cases,

including Republic of Austria v. Altmann, 541 U.S.

677 (2004), and Von Saher v. Norton Simon

Museum, 897 F.3d 1141 (9th Cir. 2018) and No. 181057 (U.S. 2019).

Stanley Levy is a co-founder of Bet Tzedek and

the Founding National Director of The Holocaust

Survivors Justice Network, a coordinated network

of over 2500 lawyers that have recovered over

$25 million in reparations, for which Stan received

the American Bar Association’s Pro Bono Publico

Award.

The Center for the Study of Law and

Genocide at LMU Loyola Law School, Los Angeles,

was inaugurated in 2008, the 60th anniversary of

the adoption of the 1948 Convention on the

Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of

Genocide (the Genocide Convention). The Center is

uniquely the first of its kind at any U.S. law school

to focus on legal aspects of, approaches to, and

solutions for genocide and mass atrocities. Through

coupling intellectual research and practical

advocacy, the Center focuses on the remedies and

victims of genocide and mass atrocities, aiming to

help survivors achieve justice.

Founding Director and Professor of Law Stanley

Goldman is a widely sought-after legal analyst for

television and radio. His 2018 book, Left to the

Mercy of a Rude Stream: The Bargain That Broke

Adolf Hitler and Saved My Mother (Potomac Books

4

2018), uncovers a piece of history about the

undermining of the Nazi regime, the women of the

Holocaust and the nuanced relationship between a

survivor and her son.

Through partnerships with NGOs, prosecutors,

tribunals, and advocates, the Justice for

Atrocities Clinic at LMU Loyola Law School,

Los Angeles, seeks to hold perpetrators of mass

atrocities legally accountable and work toward

reparations for victims and survivors of

international atrocity crimes—genocide, crimes

against humanity, war crimes—and serious human

rights abuses. The LJAC engages students in

claims-based legal work in a wide range of domestic

and international tribunals.

LJAC Director and Visiting Associate Professor

Rajika Shah has extensive experience litigating

international

human

rights

and

property

restitution cases on behalf of Armenian and

Sudanese genocide victims, indigenous groups, and

religious and ethnic minorities in numerous

complex and high-stakes disputes against foreign

sovereigns and commercial entities, at trial and

appellate levels, in both international and U.S.based tribunals.

The Holocaust Survivors Foundation USA

is a national coalition of Holocaust survivors and

survivor groups. HSF leaders have testified often

before Congress about restitution issues, open

Holocaust records and archives, and widespread

suffering that tens of thousands of survivors have

endured after the Holocaust due to the unique

5

physical and emotional harms survivors still suffer

due to the crimes of the Nazi regime.

ART ASHES (“Art Restitution to Assist

Survivors of the Holocaust Emergency Services”) is

a nonprofit foundation that funds the field of

artwork restitution, identifying objects stolen

during the Holocaust and acknowledging the

families and heirs who are the rightful owners of

such art. ART ASHES supports researchers and

attorneys working in the field of restitution, along

with claimants and heirs, to tell the story of each

artwork, the original collectors, and the history of

Nazi looting. In acknowledgment of the many

Holocaust Survivors still living, the Foundation

asks successful claimants to donate a portion of any

sale proceeds to nonprofit organizations assisting

Holocaust Survivors who live in poverty.

Approximately 50,000 Holocaust Survivors live in

or near poverty, and require financial assistance for

everyday needs such as food, rent, and utilities, and

do not receive the medical, dental, mental health,

and long-term care they need.

Stand With Us is a California-based

organization advocating against antisemitism. The

Stand With Us Holocaust Education Center (HEC),

headquartered in Los Angeles, brings interactive

Holocaust

education

programs,

films

and

curriculum to schools and communities across

North America, through in-person and virtual

platforms.

The

center’s

custom-made,

interdisciplinary programs are meant to proactively

educate students about the Holocaust and also

respond to instances of antisemitism experienced

by students at specific schools or communities. The

6

HEC works affirmatively to address the widespread

deficiencies in information about the Holocaust,

and also to counter the antisemitism connected

with Holocaust denial and distortion.

Jewish Federations of North America.

Jewish Federations are the largest collective

Jewish philanthropy in North America and raise

and distribute more than $2 billion annually and

through planned giving and endowment programs

to support flourishing Jewish communities

domestically, in Israel, and in 70 countries around

the world.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC) is a

leading international Jewish human rights

organization founded in 1977 by Rabbi Marvin Hier.

It is named in honor of the famed Holocaust

survivor and Nazi-hunter, Simon Wiesenthal who

devoted his entire life after WWII to bringing 1,100

Nazi War Criminals before the bar of justice. The

SWC confronts antisemitism, hate, and terrorism,

supports the democratic state of Israel, defends the

safety of Jews worldwide, and teaches the lessons

of the Holocaust to new generations. The SWC is an

accredited Non-Governmental Organization at the

United Nations, UNESCO, OSCE, Organization of

American States, Latin American Parliament, and

Council of Europe. Headquartered in Los Angeles,

SWC has offices in New York, Chicago, Miami,

Toronto, Paris, Jerusalem, and Buenos Aires.

Moriah Films is the two-time Academy Award®winning film division of the SWC. The Museum of

Tolerance, founded in 1993, is the SWC’s

educational arm.

7

The American Jewish Committee, founded

in 1906, is a leading global Jewish advocacy

organization with offices around the world and the

United States. Its mission is to safeguard the

welfare and security of Jews; to strengthen the

basic principles of democracy and pluralism around

the world; and to enhance the quality of Jewish life.

8

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

By its decision to continue depriving Jewish

victims of the Nazi-looted art that they rightfully

own, the Ninth Circuit has failed to heed the

express policies of California, the United States,

and the international community—all of which

endeavor to return stolen works of art (and Nazilooted art in particular)—to its rightful owners.

Moreover, the restoration of Rue St. Honoré,

Afternoon, Effect of Rain (the “Painting”) to the

rightful Jewish heirs through the application of

California law promotes Spain’s current policy to

acknowledge excesses and reverse confiscations

from the World War II period. Compelling legal and

moral principles counsel in favor of this Court

granting the Cassirers’ petition based on

California’s new statute requiring application of

California substantive law, vacating the judgment,

and remanding for application of California’s new

choice-of-law statute, or reversing based on the

Supremacy Clause and federal preemption issues

raised in the petition.

ARGUMENT: THE DECISION BELOW

CONTRAVENES THE EXPRESS INTENT OF

CALIFORNIA, THE UNITED STATES, AND

THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

Amici, all of whom are experts in Holocaust

reparations, file this brief in the belief that, beyond

the indisputable moral dimension here, this case

presents a legal issue on which the California

legislature, the United States legislative and

executive branches, and the international

community are all aligned. These governmental

9

entities have all recognized the importance of

returning Nazi-looted art back to its rightful

owners. The only bodies that have not joined this

consensus are the courts below.

I.

This Court Directed That California Choice

of Law Rules Control, and New California

Code of Civil Procedure § 338(c)(6) Mandates

That California Substantive Law Apply In

This Case.

The legal issue to be decided in this decadeslong case is whether to apply California law, which

does not allow a thief to pass good title, or Spanish

law, which permits title to pass even for stolen

goods when acquired by adverse possession. Which

law applies determines ownership of the Painting,

which all parties agree was “legally confiscated”

from Lilly Cassirer by Nazi Germany. Under

California substantive law, the Painting must be

returned to the Cassirers.

The moral dimension of this case is undeniable.

Concurring in the Ninth Circuit opinion giving rise

to this petition, Judge Callahan lamented,

“Sometimes our oaths of office and an appreciation

of our proper roles as appellate judges require that

we concur in a result at odds with our moral

compass.”

Cassirer

v.

Thyssen-Bornemisza

Collection Found., 89 F.4th 1226, 1246 (9th Cir.

2024) (Callahan, J., concurring) (emphasis added).

Reflecting Judge Callahan’s sentiment, Judge

Graber went further in her statement dissenting

from the denial of rehearing and rehearing en banc,

and demonstrated in detail the glaring errors in the

10

court’s application of California’s common law

choice-of-law framework: “The world is watching.

We should reach the result that is both legally

compelled and morally correct. I am deeply

disappointed by this court’s decision, which has the

unnecessary effect of perpetuating the harms

caused by Nazis during World War II.” Cassirer v.

Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection Found., 107 F.4th

882, 884 (9th Cir. 2024) (Graber, J., dissenting)

(emphasis added).

Crucially, Judge Graber emphasized that

Petitioners deserve their unjustly confiscated art

back not just for moral reasons, but also as a

matter of law: “The moral dimension of this case

does not dictate the legal result. I agree fully with

Judge Callahan that, if the law requires it, we must

rule contrary to our moral compass. But, here, the

law points decidedly in the same direction as our

moral compass. And the moral dimension of the

case adds significant importance to our reaching

the legally correct result.” Id. at 892-93.

In 2022, this Court recognized that the Foreign

Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”) does not bar

Petitioner’s action here because, as the lower courts

had held, “the Nazi confiscation of Rue SaintHonoré brought [the Cassirers’] suit against the

Foundation within the expropriation exception” of

the FSIA. Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza

Collection Found., 596 U.S. 107, 112 (2022). In a

concise opinion, this Court reversed the Ninth

Circuit’s choice-of-law analysis, which had

incorrectly used the federal choice-of-law rule to

conclude that Spanish law applied and remanded

for the application of California’s choice-of-law rule.

11

Although the Court did not decide the ultimate

question of which jurisdiction’s law applied, it

noted that “the use of a federal choice-of-law rule in

the courts below” could have “led to the Foundation

keeping the painting when a private museum

would have had to give it back.” Id. at 116. In sum,

this Court ruled: “The path of our decision has been

as short as the hunt for Rue Saint-Honoré was long;

our ruling is as simple as the conflict over its

rightful owner has been vexed. A foreign state or

instrumentality in an FSIA suit is liable just as a

private party would be. See [28 U.S.C.] § 1606.

That means the standard choice-of-law rule must

apply. In a property-law dispute like this one, that

standard rule is the forum State’s (here,

California’s)—not any deriving from federal

common law.” Id. at 117.

Thereafter, the Ninth Circuit, purporting to

apply California’s common law choice-of-law test,

again held that Spanish law applied. That opinion

was flawed for a number of reasons, not the least of

which is that it contravenes the collective will of

the California legislature, the United States

legislative branch, the United States executive

branch, and the international community.

In the wake of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion, the

California legislature enacted California Code of

Civil Procedure (“CCP”) § 338(c)(6), which provides

that California substantive law applies in actions

brought by California residents or their heirs to

recover stolen artworks held by museums, or

covered by the Federal Holocaust Expropriated Art

Recovery (“HEAR”) Act, i.e., Nazi-looted art. In its

findings, the California Legislature called out the

12

Cassirer Ninth Circuit opinion as exemplary of the

problem prompting the new law. It noted that the

Cassirer “court applied Spain’s law of acquisitive

prescription or adverse possession, which is based

on the principle of constructive notice that the

California courts and legislature have rejected.”

Assem. Bill 2867, 2024-2025 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2024)

§ 1(e). 2

The

California

Legislature

added

that

“[m]andating California substantive law in stolen

art cases will discourage art theft and trafficking in

stolen art, and will encourage integrity and

diligence in the art market. Further, mandating

California substantive law will draw a clear line of

liability in litigation, eliminate costly defense

tactics, and encourage settlements.” Assem. Bill

2867, 2024-2025 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2024) § 1(f).

II.

The Legal and Moral Imperatives Align

under California Law.

The decision below cannot be divorced from the

admonition of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert

Jackson, Chief Counsel to the United States, in his

2 The Legislative findings explain that in 2010, the

Legislature rejected the “holding of the Ninth Circuit Court

of Appeals in Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum . . . that

California law allowed theft victims’ claims to be defeated

based on ‘constructive’ rather than actual discovery; [and]

amended Section 338 of the Code of Civil Procedure to allow

an action to recover stolen art from a museum, gallery,

auctioneer, or dealer to be filed within six years of actual

discovery, and specifically defined ‘actual discovery’ to exclude

‘any constructive knowledge imputed by law.’” Assem. Bill

2867, 2024-2025 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2024) § 1(b).

13

opening remarks at the International Military

Tribunal in Nuremberg, who explained that the

Nazis “planned and intended conduct that involves

moral as well as legal wrong.” Hon. Robert H.

Jackson, Opening Statement at The Int’l Military

Tribunal (Nov. 21, 1945) at ¶ 13 (emphasis added).

As the Nuremberg trials showed, the Nazis

“organized plundering [of the Jews’ possessions],

planned it, disciplined it, and made it official just

as [they] organized everything else, and then [they]

compiled the most meticulous records to show that

[they] had done the best job of looting that was

possible under the circumstances.” Id. at ¶ 140.

Justice Jackson also aptly noted, “The refuge of the

defendants can be only their hope that

International Law will lag so far behind the moral

sense of mankind that conduct which is crime in

moral sense must be regarded as innocence in law.

We challenge that proposition.” Id. at ¶ 192.

This case tests whether our system is equal to

Justice Jackson’s challenge. As Justice Jackson

anticipated, and Judge Graber showed, this is the

case where the law and moral sense of mankind

must stand together.

Much like California’s recent law, the United

States has passed several laws manifesting its

intent to return Nazi-pillaged art to its lawful

owners. For instance, Congress passed the

Holocaust Victims Redress Act and stated its

purpose as follows: “[C]onsistent with the 1907

Hague Convention, all governments should

undertake good faith efforts to facilitate the return

of private and public property, such as works of art,

to the rightful owners in cases where assets were

14

confiscated from the claimant during the period of

Nazi rule and there is reasonable proof that the

claimant is the rightful owner.” Holocaust Victims

Redress Act, PL 105-158, 112 Stat. 15 (Feb. 13,

1998).

Likewise, Congress enacted the Holocaust

Expropriated Art Recovery Act (“HEAR Act”),

recognizing that “the Nazis stole hundreds of

thousands of artworks from museums and private

collections throughout Europe. This systematic

looting of the artwork and other cultural property

of Jews and other persecuted groups—one of the

Nazis’ many crimes against humanity—has been

described as the “‘greatest displacement of art in

human history.” S. Rep. 114-394, 1-2 (Dec. 6, 2016).

The two stated goals of the HEAR Act are “first, to

ensure that laws governing claims to Naziconfiscated art and other property further United

States policy as set forth in the Washington

Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art, the

Holocaust Victims Redress Act, and the Terezin

Declaration; and, second, to ensure that claims to

artwork

and

other

property

stolen

or

misappropriated by the Nazis are not unfairly

barred by statutes of limitations but are resolved in

a just and fair manner.” Id. at 6.

The international community is also aligned on

the importance of returning Nazi-looted art to its

rightful owners. Both the United States and Spain,

along with 42 other nations, have professed a

commitment to restore Nazi-confiscated art to its

rightful owners by signing the Washington

Principles, which call on states to make “[e]very

effort . . . to publicize art that is found to have been

15

confiscated by the Nazis and not subsequently

restituted in order to locate its pre-War owners or

their heirs.” Washington Conference Principles on

Nazi-Confiscated Art, U.S. Dep’t of State ¶ 5. Once

the rightful owners or their heirs are identified,

“steps should be taken expeditiously to achieve a

just and fair solution.” Id. at ¶ 8.

Additionally, both Spain and the United States,

along with 44 other countries, have signed the

Terezin

Declaration,

which

reaffirms

the

Washington Principles. The Terezin Declaration

recognizes “that art and cultural property of

victims of the Holocaust (Shoah) and other victims

of Nazi persecution was confiscated, sequestered

and spoliated, by the Nazis, the Fascists and their

collaborators through various means including

theft, coercion and confiscation, and on grounds of

relinquishment as well as forced sales and sales

under duress, during the Holocaust era between

1933-45,” and “all stakeholders to ensure that their

legal systems or alternative processes . . . facilitate

just and fair solutions with regard to Naziconfiscated and looted art, and to make certain that

claims to recover such art are resolved

expeditiously and based on the facts and merits of

the claims.” 2009 Terezin Declaration on Holocaust

Assets and Related Issues, U.S. Dep’t of State ¶ 3.

Indeed, in her concurrence, Judge Callahan

noted that “Spain, having reaffirmed its

commitment to the Washington Principles on NaziConfiscate Art when it signed the Terezin

Declaration on Holocaust Era Assets and Related

Issues, should have voluntarily relinquished the

16

Painting.” Cassirer, 89 F.4th at 1246 (Callahan, J.

concurring).

California law is now aligned with these

“federal laws, federal policies, and international

agreements prohibiting pillage and seizure of

works of art and cultural property, and calling for

restitution of seized property.” Assem. Bill 2867,

2024-2025 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2024) § 1(k).

CONCLUSION

The Ninth Circuit’s decision contravenes the

express intent of California, the United States, and

the international community—all of which

endeavor to return Nazi-looted art to its rightful

owners. Moreover, the restoration of the painting

Rue St. Honoré to the rightful Jewish heirs through

the application of California law promotes Spain’s

current efforts to acknowledge and rectify wrongs

of its own authoritarian past. 3

Accordingly, Amici urge this Court to grant

certiorari, vacate the Ninth Circuit’s opinion, and

remand for further proceedings on the merits, or

reverse based on the Supremacy Clause and federal

preemption issues raised in the petition.

3 See Sam Jones, Spain Passes Law to Bring ‘Justice’

to Franco-Era Victims, The Guardian (Oct. 5, 2022), at

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/05/spain-passeslaw-tobring-dignity-to-franco-era-victims.

17

Respectfully submitted,

BENJAMIN G. SHATZ*

Counsel of Record

ANDREW BESHAI

MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP

2049 Century Park East, Suite 1700

Los Angeles, CA 90067

BShatz@manatt.com

ABeshai@manatt.com

(310) 312-4000

Dated: February 3, 2025

PROF. MICHAEL J. BAZYLER

OF COUNSEL

ALC LAWYERS

303 N. Glenoaks Blvd., Suite 200

Burbank, CA 91502

mbazyler@alclawyers.com

STANLEY W. LEVY

FOUNDING NATIONAL DIRECTOR

BET TZEDEK’S HOLOCAUST SURVIVORS

JUSTICE NETWORK

10281 Cresta Dr.

Los Angeles, CA 90064

stanwlevy@gmail.com

STANLEY GOLDMAN

FOUNDING DIRECTOR

CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LAW AND GENOCIDE

LMU Loyola Law School

919 Albany Street

Los Angeles, CA 90015

18

RAJIKA L. SHAH

DIRECTOR

LOYOLA JUSTICE FOR ATROCITIES CLINIC

LMU Loyola Law School

919 Albany Street

Los Angeles, CA 90015

rajika.shah@lls.edu

Counsel for Amici Curiae The 1939 Society,

Bet Tzedek, Center for the Study of Law and

Genocide, Loyola Justice for Atrocities Clinic et al.