# Defense for Children International – Palestine et al v. Biden et al

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Defense for Children International – Palestine et al. v. Biden et al. is a lawsuit by Defence for Children International – Palestine et al. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against President Joe Biden, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken for the U.S. officials; alleged "failure to prevent and complicity in the unfolding genocide against Gaza". The plaintiffs include several Palestinian Americans whose families have been killed. The court dismissed the case on January 31, 2024, ruling that while "it is plausible that Israel's conduct amounts to genocide," US foreign policy was a political question over which courts lacked jurisdiction. The dismissal was upheld on appeal.

## Background

The Israel–Hamas war had seen high levels of civilian deaths in Gaza."
The plaintiffs stated that, together, over 100 of their family members had been killed in Gaza. Included among the dead are six members of Ahmed Abu Artema's family who were killed, including his 12-year-old son, five members of Dr. Al-Najjar's extended family who were killed, and eight of Mr. Abu Rokbeh's family who were killed. Several individuals and 77 human rights organizations joined the plaintiffs as amici curiae, including Josh Paul from the US State Department; genocide and Holocaust scholars William Schabas, Dr. John Cox, Dr. Victoria Sanford, Dr. Barry Trachtenberg; and Jewish Voice for Peace.

## Case timeline

The Center for Constitutional Rights filed the case for the plaintiffs on November 13, 2023. The preliminary injunction hearing took place on January 26, 2024.

## Outcome

On 31 January 2024, the case was dismissed. The judge ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction over US foreign policy due to the U.S. Constitution's political question doctrine, but that he would have preferred to have issued the injunction and urged President Biden to rethink U.S. policy, writing:$^{:8}$
   There are rare cases in which the preferred outcome is inaccessible to the Court. This is one of those cases. The Court is bound by precedent and the division of our coordinate branches of government to abstain from exercising jurisdiction in this matter. Yet, as the ICJ has found, it is plausible that Israel's conduct amounts to genocide. This Court implores Defendants to examine the results of their unflagging support of the military siege against the Palestinians in Gaza.
The often cited precedent against jurisdiction of U.S. courts in this case was Corrie v. Caterpillar, Inc (2007).
As reason to not apply the U.S. statutes in regard to the Genocide Convention on the actions of the U.S. government, the court relied on the political question doctrine and cited the reasoning in Corrie v. Caterpillar, Inc: "Whether to grant military or other aid to a foreign nation is a political decision inherently entangled with the conduct of foreign relations."$^{:7}$
The dismissal was affirmed on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on July 15, 2024.