U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

76–040 2012

S. HRG. 112–551 

HOLOCAUST-ERA CLAIMS IN THE 21ST CENTURY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JUNE 20, 2012 

Serial No. J–112–82 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

CHUCK SCHUMER, New York 

DICK DURBIN, Illinois 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

KOLAN DAVIS, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Page 

Schumer, Hon. Chuck, a U.S. Senator from the State of New York ................... 3 

Sessions, Hon. Jeff, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama .......................... 6 

WITNESSES 

Bindenagel, J.D., Vice President for Community, Government, and International Affairs, DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois ...................................... 15 

Bretholz, Leo, Holocaust Survivor, Author of ‘‘Leap into Darkness,’’ Baltimore, 

Maryland ............................................................................................................... 10 

Firestone, Renee, Holocaust Survivor, Los Angeles, California ........................... 14 

Nelson, Hon. Bill, a U.S. Senator from the State of Florida ................................ 1 

Rosenberg, Samuel L., Delegate, 41st District of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland ........................................................................................................................ 8 

Swaine, Edward T., Professor of Law, George Washington University Law 

School, Washington, DC ...................................................................................... 12 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

Responses of Samuel Rosenberg to questions submitted by Senator Sessions ... 22 

Responses of Edward Swaine to questions submitted by Senator Sessions ....... 27 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

AIA, Jewish Journal, South Florida, article .......................................................... 31 

AVHO, June 18, 2012, ICHEIC statistics .............................................................. 32 

Balitzer, Alfred, Foundation for California, Long Beach, California, June 24, 

2012, letter ............................................................................................................ 33 

Bet Tzedek, Los Angeles, California, June 18, 2012, letter ................................. 37 

Bindenagel, J.D., Vice President for Community, Government, and International Affairs, DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois 

statement .......................................................................................................... 39 

DePaul University, June 22, 2012, letter ....................................................... 48 

Blumenfield, Bob, Assembly member, Fortieth District, Sacramento, California, June 18, 2012, letter ................................................................................ 52 

Bretholz, Leo, Holocaust Survivor, Author of ‘‘Leap into Darkness,’’ Baltimore, 

Maryland ............................................................................................................... 54 

Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, Hon. Bill Nelson, Senator; 

Hon. Marco Rubio, Senator; Dennis Ross, Member of Congress; Debbie 

Wasserman Schultz, Member of Congress; Vern Buchanan, Member of Congress, Thomas J. Rooney, Member of Congress; Mario Diaz-Balart, Member 

of Congress; Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Member of Congress; Ted Deutch, Member of Congress; Allen B. West, Member of Congress; Frederica Wilson, 

Member of Congress; David Rivera, Member of Congress; Gus Bilirakis, 

Member of Congress, September 20, 2011, joint letter ..................................... 60 

CRIF, Richard Prasquier, President, Paris, France, May 31, 2012, letter ......... 62 

DePaul University College of Law, Chicago, Illinois, article ............................... 65 

Department of State, Washington, DC: 

Davidson, Douglas, Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues, statement ............ 66 

fact sheet ........................................................................................................... 69 

Emsellem, Bernard, Senior Vice President, Paris, France, letter, statement 

and attachment .................................................................................................... 70 

Firestone, Renee, Holocaust Survivor, Los Angeles, California, statement ........ 87 
Page

IV 

Holocaust Survivors Foundation USA, David Schaecter, President: 

JTA - The Golobal News Service of the Jewish People, April 4, 2012, 

joint letter ...................................................................................................... 97 

June 26, 2012, joint letter ................................................................................ 106 

David Harris, President, New York, New York, November 30, 2011, joint 

letter ............................................................................................................... 113 

Jewish Community Organizations Group, joint statement and attachment ...... 119 

Jewish Week, New York, December 27, 2011, article ........................................... 129 

Kent, Roman, Treasurer, Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, New York, New York, statement ............................................................. 133 

Lantos, Annette, Washington, DC, statement ....................................................... 145 

Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles California, June 15, 2012, article .................... 146 

Neiman, Richard H., Superintendent of Banks, New York State Banking 

Department, New York, New York, statement .................................................. 148 

New York Times International, June 2, 2011, article .......................................... 157 

Politico, POLITICO.com, June 20, 2012, article ................................................... 159 

Republican Jewish Coalition, Noah Silverman, Congressional Affairs Director, 

Washington, DC, letters ...................................................................................... 161 

Rosenberg, Samuel L., Delegate, 41st District of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, statement .................................................................................................... 165 

SNCF Invoices .......................................................................................................... 174 

Swaine, Edward T., Professor of Law, George Washington University Law 

School, Washington, DC, statement ................................................................... 180 

ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Submissions for the record not printed due to voluminous nature, previously 

printed by an agency of the Federal Government or other criteria determined by the Committee, list: 

J.S. Bindenagel Additional Submissions 

New York Banking Department 

Executive Summary from 2011 HCOP Insurance Report 
(1) 

HOLOCAUST-ERA CLAIMS IN THE 21ST 

CENTURY 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:39 p.m., in room S– 

115, The Capitol, Hon. Charles Schumer, presiding. 

Present: Senators Schumer, Klobuchar, Blumenthal, Grassley, 

and Sessions. 

Senator SCHUMER. The hearing will come to order, and I want to 

apologize in advance. 

We are going to have to keep order here, please. We are going 

to have to keep order and close the door, if need be. 

Anyway, I want to apologize to everybody. Because of all these 

votes 10 minutes apart, we had to move the hearing room from our 

usual Judiciary room to right here, and we are going to have to be 

skedaddling back and forth, unfortunately, to go upstairs and vote 

and come back. But it is a much quicker walk and will delay us 

a lot less. 

I have an opening statement which I will read, but again, because of how the votes are working, Senator Nelson, who is the 

spirit and the driving force to have this hearing and who has done 

such a good job on this issue, is going to make his opening statement before mine. Then I will make mine, and then we will call 

on the witnesses. 

Senator Nelson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, A UNITED STATES 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

The first thing I would like to insert in the record is an op-ed 

by Annette Lantos, who just came in, the widow of our former colleague, Tom Lantos, and it is directly on point. So I will give this 

to you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator SCHUMER. And without objection, we will put the entire 

statement in the record. 

[The op-ed appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator NELSON. I appreciate you calling this, and for the 

cramped quarters we apologize, but please understand this was the 

only room available here close to the Senate chamber, and the 

choice was either a postponing of the hearing or going ahead with 

it in this location because of the votes upstairs on the second floor. 
2 

This issue is extremely important. It is compensating Holocaust 

survivors and their loved ones for the value of insurance policies 

they held before and during World War II. These policies, of course, 

and the insurance company records were lost, they said, stolen 

from them or destroyed by the Nazi regime. And so I am very 

grateful to Senator Schumer for calling this hearing, and I would 

note that I am a cosponsor of Senator Schumer’s bill, which is the 

Holocaust Rail Justice Act, which is also the subject of today’s 

hearing. 

Naturally, I come to the table, the two of us come to the table 

from two States that are two of the three States with the most Holocaust survivors. Of course, most of them are now in their 80’s or 

90’s and in urgent need of assistance. 

Two survivors that are here today are constituents of mine. I 

want to recognize them: David Murmelstein from Miami and Jack 

Rubin from Boynton Beach. David and Jack, we first became 

friends when I was the elected insurance commissioner of Florida, 

and I had the occasion when it suddenly dawned on me that I had 

jurisdiction because some of those European insurance companies 

did business through subsidiaries in my State, and there that regulatory hook, we went to work. And, of course, Annette is here, and 

that is the article that I have submitted for the record. 

Now, I want to introduce Renee Firestone. She will testify regarding this legislation. It is an issue that Senator Feinstein and 

I agree, which Senator Feinstein has graciously allowed me to introduce her constituent, Renee. 

Renee was born in Czechoslovakia and at age 19 was taken to 

Auschwitz. Of her family, only Renee and her brother Frank managed to survive the war. And like many survivors, after the war 

Renee immigrated to the U.S. with a husband and an infant 

daughter. They settled in Los Angeles. She quickly dedicated herself to social justice and Holocaust remembrance and the education 

of her country. Her commitment to justice earned Renee many distinguished awards, including the Elie Wiesel Holocaust Remembrance Medal and the Golda Meir Award. Renee’s compelling life 

work was featured in the Steven Spielberg film ‘‘The Last Days.’’ 

The Judiciary Committee hearing today gives the Senate another 

opportunity to examine what has been done to help survivors like 

Renee and the others that I have introduced from Florida. 

Members of this Committee will review the efforts to compensate 

Holocaust victims for the value of their insurance assets, and many 

feel that these efforts have been delayed, flawed, and insufficient. 

And as a former insurance commissioner who had to deal with 

those European companies, I can tell you I know all the tricks, and 

they have employed all of them. 

The International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance 

Claims concluded in 2007 and left many of the claimants dissatisfied or undercompensated, and many continue to feel that some of 

the insurance companies that participated in the commission still 

have not done enough to compensate Holocaust survivors. And that 

is why I introduced this legislation that creates a new Federal 

cause of action that enables survivors to sue these companies in 

Federal court for damages and attorneys’ fees for compensation for 

their insurance policies. And with ICHEIC’s disbandment, the 
3 

court system represents one of the few remaining avenues by which 

Holocaust victims and their survivors may still pursue their legal 

rights. 

We all know that no amount of financial compensation can ever 

make up for the wrong of the Holocaust, but many of us who have 

been working on this issue for years are committed to doing what 

we can to help those survivors recover whatever we can that has 

been taken from them. 

I have always believed that people who are wronged are entitled 

to seek justice. I remain committed to advocating for the compensation for them, and that is why serving Florida’s Holocaust survivor 

community has been a clear top priority of mine in my years in 

public service. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for the privilege of letting 

me come here and kick this hearing off. 

Mr. Chairman, I have heard every excuse in the world on, ‘‘Well, 

we lost the policies,’’ or ‘‘They have already claimed their assets,’’ 

or ‘‘Well, show us proof of death.’’ The last time I checked, Hitler 

did not keep any of those records. I have heard all the excuses, and 

it is time for us to do justice for these people. 

Senator SCHUMER. Well, let me thank you. Senator Nelson, you 

have been a true leader on this issue. 

Senator Nelson is one of our most effective Senators. He is a real 

fighter for things he believes in, and I know he believes in this. As 

I said, it was at his request that we had this hearing and joined 

our two proposals in the hearing. And I can tell people who are 

seeking justice that they could not have a better advocate than 

Senator Nelson. 

Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. SCHUMER, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

Senator SCHUMER. Now I am going to give my opening statement, and first I want to start by thanking our Chairman, Chairman Leahy, for letting me have the gavel today in order to explore 

this exceptionally important topic: how to resolve what I hope, 

what we all hope are among the last remaining reparation claims 

stemming from the murder of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust. 

We all know the horror of the Holocaust. My great-grandmother, 

who was the matriarch of her family, was told to leave her home. 

She and her family had gathered on the front porch. They refused 

to leave, and they just machine-gunned all of them down in 1941. 

So, obviously, I have personal experience with the horrors of the 

Holocaust, but the horrors are just awful. 

Sometimes we refer to the horror as ‘‘unspeakable.’’ But unspeakable is exactly what the Holocaust must never become. Those who 

perpetrated it, those who benefited from it want us not to speak. 

But we are here to speak and to have this hearing. 

Now, we must continue to find words to describe if not explain 

what happened during those very dark years of human history. We 

must make sure the stories of the survivors and the witnesses who 

have gone before us live on and become part of our human DNA. 

We must ensure that we listen to those who are still with us, and 
4 

at the least, the very least, it is our collective moral obligation to 

make sure that those whose lives were forever changed by the Holocaust are not forgotten. 

As the survivors among us grow old, too many are sinking into 

poverty and neglect. In fact, the numbers are shocking and will 

surprise people who have not studied the issue. 

The Jewish Claims Conference reports in 2010 that of the 

517,000 living Holocaust survivors in the world, half live in poverty. That is disgraceful. Most of these now elderly survivors live 

in the former Soviet Union and in Israel. Many survivors who are 

eking by nonetheless need nursing care and other services that can 

be impossibly expensive. 

I am certain that everyone in this room agrees on one thing: that 

we need to do everything in our collective power to make sure that 

these survivors, these resilient, brave people, our dear friends and 

family, do not fall through the cracks. International efforts to hold 

accountable the perpetrators and accomplices of this terrible crime 

have been a very important part of giving the Holocaust survivors 

some modicum of peace and well-being. 

The two bills we will discuss today arise from the desire to ensure that survivors can get an approximation of justice, and we can 

only call it an approximation, and not even a close one, because 

nothing will ever make this right or make them whole. They all 

live with the memories. They all live with the holes in their hearts 

of loved ones who perished. 

The first of our two bills is the Holocaust Rail Justice Act. Today 

is the first hearing that has been held on this bill in the U.S. Senate, and I am pleased to have the opportunity to talk about it. Here 

is the relevant history. 

During World War II, more than 76,000 Jews and thousands of 

other so-called undesirables were transported from France to Nazi 

death camps aboard trains owned and operated by the Societe 

Nationale des Chemins de Fer Francais, the SNCF. Fewer than 3 

percent of those deported or those who boarded those awful trains 

survived. Many did not survive the train ride itself. And that train, 

which was operated independently by SNCF, having entered into 

an agreement with the German Government to maintain control of 

its trains was itself a horror. 

A report commissioned by SNCF found that SNCF alone decided 

to use cattle cars to transport victims, refused to provide food or 

water despite the pleas of Red Cross workers. 

In a tragic example of irony, something worthy of Dickens’ 

‘‘Bleak House,’’ SNCF escaped legal liability for its actions in 

France by claiming it was a commercial entity and could not be 

sued in French administrative court. Meanwhile, in the U.S. SNCF 

escaped liability by arguing it was an instrumentality of the 

French Government and, therefore, entitled to sovereign immunity. 

They were one thing in one place, the opposite in another place, all 

to escape liability. 

Just recently, 70 years after deportations began, SNCF expressed 

regret for its deportations. But as we will hear from witnesses 

today, that must only be the beginning. It has never paid for its 

actions. Never. Even if the French Government’s reparation programs could somehow be said to cover SNCF’s actions—and I be-
5 

lieve they cannot—those programs are, arguably, closed to Americans or at least highly inaccessible. 

The Holocaust Rail Justice Act would make clear that SNCF cannot claim sovereign immunity for its independent actions against 

the Jews and other deportees and would allow SNCF to be sued in 

U.S. courts. At this point, opening up the U.S. courts may be the 

only way that survivors can obtain the reparations they so clearly 

deserve from SNCF. 

I want to note here that this bill is intended only to cover SNCF, 

which was not a party to any Holocaust litigation settlement entered into by the United States. The bill is not intended to allow 

claims against any companies that are covered by the U.S.-German 

Holocaust Settlement Agreement or any other settlement agreement, and we are redrafting the bill to reflect that so we can make 

sure that the bill is effective and not litigated against. 

Now, the second bill that will be considered is Senator Nelson’s 

bill. It is called the Restoration of Legal Rights for Claimants 

under Holocaust-Era Insurance Policies Act of 2011, and as Senator Nelson talked about, the purpose of this bill is to allow survivors and heirs who believe that they may have claims against 

European insurers because of unpaid policies from the Holocaust to 

sue those insurers in U.S. courts. Several factors have led to substantial debate about this bill. 

First, the assets of many if not almost all European insurers 

were nationalized by the Nazis, the Soviets, or both. For the most 

part, the hundreds of small insurance companies that existed before the war either collapsed during the economic crisis of the 

1930s or ceased to exist during the war. Many, many records were 

lost forever. 

Second, in 1998, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, six remaining European insurers, the Claims Conference, 

the World Jewish Restitution Organization, and the State of Israel 

signed a memo of understanding that became known as ICHEIC. 

In addition, the Department of State under both Clinton and Bush 

administrations and now under the Obama administration have 

supported ICHEIC in court as the exclusive forum for resolving 

these particular Holocaust-era claims. Numerous Jewish groups, 

including B’nai B’rith International, the Anti-Defamation League, 

and the American Jewish Committee, also support ICHEIC as the 

acceptable forum for resolving the 70-year-old policy insurance 

claims. 

ICHEIC eventually paid out $300 million to 47,353 claimants, 

over 34,000 of whom were awarded $1,000 humanitarian payments 

because no issuing company could be identified from the remaining 

records. Some survivors were left extremely dissatisfied with this 

process and remain concerned that, put simply, too few claims were 

honored. They have argued in court and here in Congress that the 

State Department had no authority to effectively settle these 

claims on their behalf, and they want their day in court. They have 

asserted that these insurers have not been forthcoming with their 

records or assets, and we are going to hear and bring to light important testimony on these issues of critical importance to the survivor community. And I am pleased to welcome everyone here to 

participate in the discussion. 
6 

I share the survivors’ goal: to make sure that remaining survivors are not left destitute, are respected, and have access to the 

records, resources, and justice that they are, frankly, entitled to. It 

is the very least we can do. 

And so with that, let me call on Senator Sessions if he would like 

to make a statement. And while Senator Sessions speaks, I am 

going to go up and vote and come right back down, and then you 

can go up and vote. And if Senator Sessions finishes, we will recess 

until I come back. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF ALABAMA 

Senator SESSIONS. Chuck would be perfectly happy if I missed 

the vote. [Laughter.] 

But he is not going to miss it. You can be sure of that. I know 

he works hard, but I can usually get to the gym a little before he 

does in the morning. He is a hard worker, I can tell you that. 

I would just say that I am looking forward to learning more 

about this issue. I got involved with the Japanese World War II 

prisoners of war and the abuses there and the litigation attempts 

over that. We engaged the State Department and tried to figure 

out what the principles are in these kind of cases, and as a former 

United States Attorney for 12 years, I just have some sense that 

we need to be sure we are doing this right. Even though people 

deeply feel they are wronged, I think it is perfectly healthy and 

good to bring out what happened, put the facts on the table, and 

let us not be timid about knowing the truth, and then we will ask 

ourselves what the proper legal remedies are and how it should be 

handled. You have to acknowledge that there are wars and settlements of wars all over the world, and it is hard to settle if decades 

later people are still litigating over it. 

So I do not know what the right answer is, frankly, but I respect 

Chuck. He is a very good lawyer and sophisticated in these issues, 

and I look forward to working through the hearing. 

I guess I will take my moment and go vote, and I look forward 

to coming back and hearing the comments of the witnesses as we 

go forward. Thank you. 

[Recess at 3 to 3:03 p.m.] 

Senator GRASSLEY. This is a terrible environment in which to 

hold a hearing, meaning not the environment of this room but the 

fact that we have votes upstairs and it is not very well organized. 

It is no fault of this Committee or the Chairman or anybody else. 

I am glad that we are able to work together on this hearing between the Chairman and this side of the aisle. I am also glad for 

all the witnesses that have been able to come and that we had consensus on that. And I appreciate the witnesses’ sharing their experiences and perspectives with us. I am very interested in hearing— 

now I will have to read the testimony. 

Let me ask each of you, if you would—these are very general 

questions. I hope you appreciate that. And I do not suppose all of 

you would have to respond, but if a few of you would respond, I 

would appreciate it. 

Is there anything beyond your written testimony or beyond what 

has already been given in the Committee that I have not heard yet, 
7 

but I would like to give each of you an opportunity to expand on 

anything that has not been said that you would like to expand 

upon? I am not calling on a specific person, but maybe you did not 

get a chance to give your view. 

Mr. ROSENBERG. We have not given our testimony yet. 

Senator GRASSLEY. OK. Well, what happened in the last halfhour? [Laughter.] 

Mr. ROSENBERG. We were waiting. 

Senator GRASSLEY. You go ahead. 

Mr. ROSENBERG. We were waiting for—— 

Senator GRASSLEY. Is it OK if he starts to give his testimony? 

Staff. Absolutely, unless you would like to read the introductions. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Well, if they have not been introduced yet, 

yes. 

The Honorable Samuel Rosenberg, Delegate, 41st District of 

Maryland, has been a member of the Maryland House of Delegates 

since 1983 and currently serves as Vice Chair of their Ways and 

Means Committee. Delegate Rosenberg has created programs encouraging students to enter public service and help extend Maryland’s civil rights laws. Among his many significant legislative accomplishments, last year Delegate Rosenberg’s landmark legislation passed unanimously and was passed into law. Governor 

O’Malley signed it in May 2011. This bill requires any entity pursuing publicly funded rail contracts to disclose participation in 

transporting victims to Nazi death camps during the Holocaust and 

to post all records online. 

Leo Bretholz is a survivor and SNCF victim. He lived in Vienna 

until he was forced to flee in 1938. He spent the next 7 years running from the Nazi regime. In 1947, he arrived in the United 

States where he married and raised a family. In 1998, he co-authored a book chronicling his experiences during the Holocaust entitled ‘‘Leap into Darkness: Seven Years on the Run in Wartime 

Europe.’’ The title references the evening he leapt to freedom from 

a moving SNCF train bound for Auschwitz. He frequently lectures 

at schools, universities, synagogues, churches, and various groups. 

Professor Edward Swaine teaches and writes in the area of public international law, foreign relations, international antitrust, and 

contracts. Professor Swaine joined the George Washington University Law School faculty in 2006 after serving for one year as a 

counselor on international law at the Department of State. At GW 

he is a member of the Executive Council of the American Society 

of International Law, co-chairs the international law and domestic 

interest groups, and is a member of the Advisory Committee on 

Public International Law of the U.S. State Department. 

If you will continue, please? 

Senator SCHUMER. It would be my pleasure, and I want to thank 

my good friend Senator Grassley for stepping in and doing the introductions. We are up to Ms. Firestone. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Yes. I just read the first page. 

Senator SCHUMER. OK. At the age of 19, Ms. Firestone was imprisoned for 13 months in Auschwitz-Birkenau. In 1948, she arrived in the United States with her family where she became a 

noted fashion designer. She is a tireless leader in many areas of 

social justice and Holocaust remembrance and education. She has 
8 

conducted workshops for educators, lectured, and has been the subject of countless interviews regarding the Holocaust and its contemporary implications. We are honored you are here, Ms. Firestone. 

And, finally, Ambassador Bindenagel served as the U.S. Special 

Envoy for Holocaust Issues from 1998 to 2002. He previously has 

testified at congressional hearings on the negotiation and implementation of the agreement regarding the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims, ICHEIC. Ambassador 

Bindenagel played a prominent role representing the U.S. Government negotiations that led to the creation of Foundation Remembrance, Responsibility, and Future in Germany as part of the 2001 

U.S.-German Holocaust settlement. For the last 7 years, he served 

as vice president at DePaul University in Chicago. 

We welcome all of you. Your entire statements will be read into 

the record, your full statements. We ask each of you to limit your 

statements to 5 minutes, particularly because of the unusual and 

rather warm circumstances in this room. So we will start from my 

left and work our way over. First, Honorable Samuel Rosenberg. 

Welcome, Mr. Rosenberg. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE SAMUEL L. ROSENBERG, 

DELEGATE, 41ST DISTRICT OF MARYLAND, STATE OF MARYLAND, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 

Mr. ROSENBERG. Thank you very much. Senator Schumer, Senator Grassley, Senator Sessions, thank you for the opportunity to 

express support for the Holocaust Rail Justice Act and share my 

efforts for Maryland to require transparency from SNCF. Senator 

Schumer, your tireless fight to provide these survivors their day in 

court is remarkable. 

I also applaud those who support this legislation in the House 

and the Senate, including the many members of the Maryland congressional delegation. With the increasing number of bipartisan 

supporters, including Majority Leader Reid, Foreign Relations 

Committee Chairman Kerry, Senator Nelson, and Senator Rubio, I 

am confident that this Congress will provide the victims with their 

long-awaited day in court. 

After SNCF’s related companies sought to bid on a Maryland 

commuter rail contract, I was stunned to learn about the company’s actions during the Holocaust and its ongoing mistreatment 

of my constituents. SNCF’s blatant refusal to fully acknowledge its 

role in the Holocaust led me and my colleagues in Annapolis to 

pass legislation requiring transparency. 

Until recently, SNCF refused to acknowledge its role in the Holocaust. Today, SNCF does not deny sending 76,000 Jews and thousands of others, including 11,000 children, to their deaths. Yet the 

company refuses to take responsibility. 

SNCF willingly collaborated with the Nazis and retained control 

of the technical conditions of the deportations which ultimately led 

to those deaths. SNCF hides behind foreign sovereign immunity, as 

Senator Schumer pointed out, claiming it should not be held accounts in U.S. court. The company has neither paid reparations to 

its victims nor to existing French reparations programs which do 

not specifically cover the SNCF deportations. 
9 

SNCF’s actions during World War II were unconscionable and 

unforgivable. The company’s ongoing mistreatment of its victims 

makes clear that these are no longer the sins of SNCF’s fathers. 

The company is engaged in an extensive PR campaign to downplay 

its role in the Holocaust and stem the growing tide of opposition 

standing between the company and lucrative contracts. 

In 2010, the company issued its first apology. The Los Angeles 

Times editorial board said it best, noting that the apology was ‘‘apparently not prompted by regret. Rather, it seems to have been 

spurred by the company’s desire to win multibillion dollar highspeed rail contracts in California and Florida.’’ 

I am proud that my State, California, and Florida have all taken a stand on this issue. As Florida contemplated undertaking a $2.6 

billion high-speed rail project, the company sought to underwrite a 

partnership between the Shoah Memorial of France and Florida’s 

Task Force on Holocaust Education. Survivors were outraged by 

the company’s attempt to influence Holocaust education. I would 

like to enter into the record a letter written by roughly half of the 

Florida delegation to Florida’s Commissioner of Education stating 

that ‘‘[i]nstead of attempting to engage in a public relations campaign, SNCF would be wise to resolve the claims of the Holocaust 

survivors as a consequence of their actions.’’ 

Senator SCHUMER. Without objection, the letter will be added to 

the record. 

Mr. ROSENBERG. Thank you. 

[The letter appears as a submission for the record.] 

Mr. ROSENBERG. The Florida Education Commissioner ultimately, and rightfully, canceled the partnership. 

When SNCF sought to bid on public contracts, California 

Assemblymember Blumenfield and I each introduced legislation to 

ensure that our constituents would know the character of the companies seeking tax dollars. Maryland’s law requires companies 

seeking to bid on MARC contracts to digitize and post online relevant Holocaust-era archives. 

True to form, after the Maryland legislation was signed into law, 

the company released documents to three Holocaust museums and 

issued a press release boasting of its proactive new phase of transparency while failing to mention the law’s requirements. 

The Maryland legislation should provide transparency, but that 

is not enough. For over 10 years, SNCF has escaped responsibility 

in the courts arguing one way, and then the other as Senator Schumer pointed out. 

I am certain, if I may close on a personal note, that Telford Taylor, my constitutional law professor at Columbia and chief prosecutor for the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, would be immensely proud of our work. I recently returned from a visit to Yad 

Vashem where I viewed a film of individuals about to be executed 

by a Nazi firing squad. While it is too late for those victims to seek 

justice, the approximation of justice, it is not too late for SNCF’s 

victims like Leo Bretholz, my friend and constituent. 

While SNCF tries to run out the clock on the survivors, we must 

all stand up—on the local, State, and Federal levels—and together 

demand that the company finally be held accountable. 

Thank you. 
10 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rosenberg appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you, Mr. Rosenberg, for your service in 

Maryland, and thank you for staying within the time limit. 

We will next hear from Mr. Bretholz. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF LEO BRETHOLZ, HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR, 

AUTHOR OF ‘‘LEAP INTO DARKNESS,’’ BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. Thank you. I just want you to know, if you 

know—— 

Senator SCHUMER. If you could just pull the microphone a little 

closer, that would be great, Mr. Bretholz. 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. If you know some of my story, I escaped from 

trains and crossed rivers and crossed the Alps, but to come to this 

room to find this room was another experience. [Laughter.] 

I just want you to know. 

Senator Sessions, Ranking Member Grassley, Senator Schumer, 

and members of the Committee, my name is Leo Bretholz. I am a 

Holocaust survivor. After World War II, I immigrated to the United 

States and settled in Baltimore. I am 98—sorry. That will be one 

time. I am 91 years of age and speak regularly about my experiences during the Holocaust. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify about the atrocities that 

I experienced at the hands of the French rail company SNCF. 

Thank you especially, Senator Schumer—and Senator Cardin is not 

here, he was supposed to be, and my Senator from Maryland, Senator Mikulski, who are very supportive of all of this, and the other 

members of the Maryland congressional delegation, and the many 

legislators who have made certain that I and SNCF’s other victims 

are not forgotten. 

Senator Schumer, thank you particularly for holding this hearing 

today and for your unwavering pursuit of justice for the survivors. 

Many thanks. 

This year marks the 70th anniversary of the first SNCF transports from Drancy—a transit camp north of Paris—toward death 

camps, yet I still remember the haunting night I jumped from an 

SNCF train bound for Auschwitz as if it was yesterday. Ladies and 

gentlemen, this was the 6th of November 1942, and if it were not 

for that day, I would not be sitting here. 

In October 1942, at the age of 21, I ended up near Paris in the 

internment camp Drancy. We called it the ‘‘antechamber of Auschwitz.’’ The train to Auschwitz was owned and operated by SNCF. 

They were paid per head and per kilometer to transport innocent 

victims across France and ultimately to the death camps. They collaborated willingly with the Germans. Here I have a copy of an invoice sent by SNCF seeking to be paid for the services they provided. A money matter. SNCF pursued payment on this bill after 

the liberation of Paris, after the Nazis were gone. This was not coercion. This was business. I would like to submit this invoice for 

the record. I think you have that. 

Senator SCHUMER. Without objection, yes. Definitely. 

[The invoice appears as a submission for the record.] 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. SNCF deported 76,000 Jews on those trains, including over 11,000 children. They would count us off, 50 into each 
11 

cattle car. Now, this was all done with precision, with deception, 

and with cruelty, as an aside. They were counted off, 50 into each 

cattle car and the 51st person was the young boy that belonged to 

that family. The boy began to scream, and the father pleaded to 

allow them to stay together. But with cold precision, the boy was 

shoved in one car, his family into another. I believe that was the 

last time they saw each other. 

For the entire journey, SNCF provided us one piece of triangle 

cheese—you know, Laughing Cow—one stale piece of bread, and no 

water for the entire trip. There was hardly room to stand or sit or 

squat in the cattle car. And there was one bucket in the car to relieve ourselves for 50 people. Visualize this. Within that cattle car, 

people were sitting and standing and praying and weeping and arguing and fighting—the whole gamut of human emotions. My 

friend Manfred who was with me, also a Viennese fellow, and I 

began to try to escape. Many in the cattle car fearing the guards 

would punish everyone if we were found out, urged us not to even 

try. I also was beginning to doubt our plan when an elderly woman 

on crutches spoke out. She wielded that crutch like a weapon and 

pointed it at me and said, ‘‘You must do it.’’ A woman on crutches. 

‘‘If you get out,’’ she said, ‘‘maybe you can tell the story. Who else 

will tell the story? ’’ I can still see her face today. An elderly 

woman. 

Manfred and I set out to pry apart the bars on the windows. 

First we tried belts. They slipped off. Then someone suggested we 

dip our sweaters into the human waste on the bottom of the car. 

There was all around human waste. We kept twisting the wet 

sweaters tighter and tighter like a wet tourniquet. The human 

waste dripped down our arms. We kept going for hours with our 

rolled-up shirt sleeves. Kept going for hours. We kept going for 

hours until finally there was just enough room for us to squeeze 

through. I went first. My friend Manfred helped me climb out of 

the tiny window, and I stood on the coupling between the two cars. 

He followed me and we held on tight so as not to slip and fall beneath the train and waited for it to take a curve where it would 

slow down. Then we jumped to our freedom in eastern France. 

Of the 1,000 people with me on the SNCF convoy number 42— 

there were over 70 convoys; this was number 42—on the 6th of November 1942, only five survived the war of the 1,000. If I had not 

jumped from that train, I would not be here today. It is my duty 

to speak for those who did not survive—for the old woman who 

pushed us to escape, for my family, and for the millions of others 

who were silenced. 

SNCF willingly collaborated with the Nazis. Had the company 

resisted, even to a small degree, or had they not imposed those horrific conditions, many lives would have been saved. In the almost 

70 years since the end of the war, SNCF has paid no reparations 

nor been held accountable. The company did not even apologize 

until 2010 when it was criticized for pursuing high-speed rail in 

the United States without fully accounting for its role in the Holocaust. As it was during the Holocaust for SNCF, so it is now—all 

about money. They made money shipping people, and they wanted 

to make money building railroads. 
12 

The Holocaust Rail Justice Act is the last opportunity we will 

have to see justice and our day in court within our lifetimes. The 

survivors seek only to have our day in court for the first time. Seventy years is far too long to wait for a company to accept responsibility for the death and suffering it caused. I urge you please to 

pass the Holocaust Rail Justice Act this Congress before it is too 

late. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bretholz appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you for your ever so powerful testimony, Mr. Bretholz. Thank you for your courage as well. 

Professor Swaine. 

STATEMENT OF EDWARD T. SWAINE, PROFESSOR OF LAW, 

GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. SWAINE. Senator Nelson, Senator Schumer, thank you for the 

opportunity to testify about the international law implications of 

the Holocaust Rail Justice Act. I am honored and moved to be in 

the presence of Holocaust survivors and others who advocate on 

their behalf. 

I am speaking about a different aspect of this important issue, 

but I would stress the room for agreement here. All would agree 

that, irrespective of liability and immunity issues, justice for the 

victims of Holocaust deportations, given these deeply disturbing 

claims, is imperative, and attention by political bodies in the U.S., 

France, and elsewhere is welcome. 

There should also be agreement that international law plays a 

role, most importantly, the human rights articulated in the wake 

of the Holocaust, but also respect for international institutions and 

for other international principles such as State responsibility, the 

obligation to make reparations, and any applicable immunity. Ultimately we should advance according to the rule of law. 

As I explained in my submission, Congress designed the Foreign 

Sovereign Immunities Act with a view to what international law 

permitted. These standards protect the U.S. Government as well. 

My objective is to describe these parameters and to try to find constructive solutions. 

The International Court of Justice recently provided guidance in 

a case involving crimes committed during Germany’s occupation of 

Italy. The court held that Italian suits against Germany were 

barred by customary international law principles of sovereign immunity, which also bind the United States. 

Those facts were different than those here. The wrongs were by 

the German military, not a state-owned entity like a railroad, and 

judicial proceedings were conducted in Italy where the wrongs were 

committed. But some of the court’s principles translate. 

For example, the court held it was required to apply the modern 

law of sovereign immunity, not the law as of when the wrongs occurred, since immunity concerns the judicial proceedings that occur 

in the present day. 

The court also held that immunity for sovereign acts applies regardless of the nature of the underlying international wrongs, no 
13 

matter how terrible they are. These holdings express the traditional view, which is also how our courts have previously understood the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. 

Applying our Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, courts have dismissed claims against the French national railroad on the reasoning—that I simply report—that SNCF is part of a foreign state 

and that no exceptions apply. The restrictive theory immunity allows suits to be brought based on a foreign state’s commercial activities, but claims have to be brought under the present law based 

on activity in the United States or otherwise satisfy a geographic 

nexus. 

The bill would change this result in two ways. First, it focuses 

on the status of the railroads during World War II as opposed to 

today. Second, as to those railroads and those claims, it would remove any requirement of a U.S. connection. 

Based on my examination of the Act, I would say that U.S. law 

can be changed. The questions I address are how to develop law 

that can be effective while at the same time respecting our international law obligations. 

The bill’s historical perspective is in some tension with the view 

expressed by the United States and by other courts that sovereign 

immunity focuses on the present. Sovereign immunity is not about 

whether a defendant thought it would be immune when it acted. 

No one—no one—should be confident when they act that they can 

commit international crimes. Rather, the topic of immunity concerns a sovereign state now and the burden of judicial proceedings 

in foreign courts. Doing what the bill suggests would, in my estimation, require additional safeguards. 

International law does seem to permit treating certain kinds of 

separate state entities distinctly. Perhaps the United States could 

argue that this present law, the present international law, permits 

applying this approach even to prior facts as they then existed. 

Even this, however, would not permit disregarding any proof that 

a state entity might offer that they were exercising sovereign authority. It is hard to avoid continuing litigation as to the scope of 

immunity while remaining consistent with international law. I do 

not presuppose anything about how that test would apply to the 

French railroad. 

The second solution, disregarding any U.S. connection, puts the 

bill at the frontier of attempts at universal jurisdiction. This is a 

controversial area. It is difficult to identify bright lines. But it is 

notable that the bill would combine this extraterritorial reach, 

which presents its own issue, with what appears to be at least a 

marginal encroachment on sovereign immunity. This makes the 

case harder in some respects than the case of Germany versus 

Italy. Again, we can discuss creative solutions which might include 

focusing on U.S. events or U.S. nationals. 

Any solution involves a dilemma. The bill is targeted, appropriately and reasonably, at a limited class of compelling claims during a limited period against a limited class of defendants. This 

helps reduce the potential for diplomatic objections. The difficulty 

is that targeting particular states and their immunities is a provocative and easily copied approach here and abroad, including in 

matters that might involve the U.S. Government. Ideally, the FSIA 
14 

would be updated, if necessary, with a clear view as to how it applies to other cases, and articulate an international standard to 

which the United States itself would be willingly held. I am hopeful 

that this or some other solution may be reached. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Swaine appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you very much for your erudite testimony, Professor Swaine. 

We will now hear from Ms. Firestone. 

OK. There is a voting starting, Ms. Firestone. I am going to go 

vote while Senator Klobuchar and Senator Sessions are here, and 

then I will be back down. So we will not have to interrupt the hearing. 

Ms. Firestone, you may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF RENEE FIRESTONE, HOLOCAUST SURVIVOR, 

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 

Ms. FIRESTONE. Dear Chairman Schumer and members of the 

Committee, thank you for inviting me to present a voice in support 

of Senate bill 466. I come before you as an individual, but I speak 

on behalf of all survivors and the millions whose voices will never 

be heard. 

My name is Renee Firestone. I am an Auschwitz survivor. I 

would like to address a serious situation still plaguing the survivors. 

For years, we have been trying in vain to collect on insurance 

policies issued to our families prior to World War II and which remain to date largely unpaid. When we tried to make our claim to 

the insurance companies, they had the audacity to tell us that we 

needed original documents or we were asked for death certificates 

of the people to whom policies were issued. Were they really insane? Did these insurance companies really believe that after the 

Nazis stripped us of our families, our rights, our possessions, our 

dignity, even the hair on our heads, that they were standing at the 

door of the gas chambers, where they murdered my mother, handing out death certificates proving their crime? 

This insult would have been bad enough, but we survivors, now 

American citizens, many of whom after emerging from the depths 

of Hell, came here and served in the American military, are being 

deprived by our own Government of our constitutional right to seek 

redress from the courts and claim what is rightfully ours. 

You can never know, Mr. Chairman, just how painful and retraumatizing that is to us survivors. I hear weekly from many of 

my fellow survivors how hurt and outraged they are that this is 

happening to them. In fact, their frustration finally reached the 

breaking point, and over the last 2 weeks, hundreds of survivors 

and their families, family members, and supporters signed petitions, the majority of which were from New York and California. 

Signers include a Nobel Laureate and his wife, a well-known medical researcher, and the petitions have gone to other Members of 

Congress as well as to the media. They want the world to know 

that injustice has been heaped on them. 
15 

In spite of what was promised by ICHEIC, Allianz, Generali, 

Exa, and others who are the sole repositories of the proof of these 

policies never released the full list of the insured. In my case, I was 

told that my father’s name was not found. However, my first cousin, Fred Jackson, was the first survivor who applied to ICHEIC 

and collected from Generali because he was lucky enough to find 

some papers in his house on his return from the death camp. 

Fred’s mother was my father’s sister. We lived in the same town 

where my father built our beautiful villa, which is still there, and 

where he had a successful business in the main center of our town. 

My father was the oldest sibling and adviser to the whole family. 

He and my aunt were very close. There is no way that my aunt 

had insurance and my father did not. Why would he advise others 

to get insurance and not get it for himself and for his family? 

All we are asking for is to have our rights restored through Senate bill 466 and to be able to seek the aid of our court system to 

enforce our claims under these insurance policies. We are not beggars or greedy, as some call us. Our families paid for these policies 

with the sweat of their brows, and now we only want what is rightfully ours. 

Shamefully, many Jewish organizations stand in opposition to 

the will of the survivors and the passage of Senate bill 466. How 

obscene and repugnant that our own people would deny the rights 

of the survivors and how painful. Where were these same organizations when we and our parents, brothers, sisters, and friends were 

being murdered? Did they come to our aid? How dare they now oppose us. 

I wish that my dear friend Congressman Tom Lantos, the original champion of this bill, would be here with us today. I know his 

lovely wife, Annette, is here, and I want her to know how grateful 

I am to both of them. 

Again, I am here today to ask this honorable Committee to support Senate bill 466 and ensure its swift implementation while 

some survivors are still alive. We are in our 80s and 90s now. Half 

of all the survivors in this country are destitute. Mr. Chairman, 

time is of the essence in order to serve justice and preserve the dignity of the remaining survivors in our final hours. 

I thank the Chairman and the members of the honorable Committee for your time and for giving me an opportunity to be heard. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Firestone appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR [presiding]. Thank you. 

Mr. Bindenagel. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE J.D. BINDENAGEL, VICE 

PRESIDENT FOR COMMUNITY, GOVERNMENT, AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, DEPAUL UNIVERSITY, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

Committee. I am J.D. Bindenagel, the former Special Envoy for 

Holocaust Issues, and it is humbling to be among Holocaust survivors, Annette Lantos and others. I would also like to acknowledge 

that there are two others who are here with me today: Max 
16 

Liebman is a Holocaust survivor, and he is accompanied by 

Menachem Rosensaft, a vice president of the American Gathering 

of Holocaust Survivors. 

I have been asked to review what the efforts of the International 

Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims were regarding 

unpaid insurance claims from World War II and the Nazi period. 

That acronym, as Senator Schumer—— 

Senator SCHUMER [presiding]. Could I just interrupt you, Ambassador Bindenagel. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. Yes, sir. 

Senator SCHUMER. Senator Klobuchar is very interested and has 

been a great supporter on this issue, but she has to go up and vote. 

So I wanted to—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. Quite understood. Thank you very much. 

Senator SCHUMER. We are joined now by Senator Blumenthal, 

another supporter. Please proceed. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As a reviewer of the efforts of ICHEIC, I would like to start off 

by noting that the overarching interest of ICHEIC negotiations was 

to bring some measure of justice to Holocaust survivors and other 

victims of the Nazi era through compensation, where appropriate, 

but also information where available. We set out, as Senator Schumer noted earlier, concerned parties, governments, nongovernmental organizations, to resolve Holocaust-era insurance claims 

through dialogue, through negotiation and cooperation rather than 

subject victims and their families to the prolonged uncertainty and 

delay that would accompany litigation against the industry. 

U.S. regulators and European companies and the Holocaust survivor representatives created ICHEIC in 1998 and established policies and processes to identify claimants, locate unpaid insurance 

policies, assist Holocaust survivors and their families in resolving 

claims. 

Survivors and their heirs were able to submit inquiries and 

claims to insurers and partner entities at no cost and in their native language. ICHEIC, in close cooperation with 75 European insurance companies and a number of partner entities, resolved more 

than 90,000 claims. In short, the ICHEIC process went to great 

lengths to be claims-driven, claimant-friendly, and included vocal 

advocates of the claimant community. One only had to file a claim 

and specify the name and home town of the victim. No lawyers 

were needed to file a claim, and there was no cost to the claimant 

in the process. 

Claimants could then, and now can, also access the website 

where there appear more than 550,000 names and a list of likely 

policy holders, regardless of whether they were outstanding or compensated in the past, in search of a deceased relative who also was 

a Nazi victim. Moreover, virtually all significant insurers of Holocaust victims participated in this process. 

Of course, accepting that ICHEIC was not and could not be perfect, especially given the loss of information during and after World 

War II, some key numbers from ICHEIC will help summarize what 

was achieved regarding insurance claims. ICHEIC paid some 

48,000 claimants out of the 90,000 claims that were analyzed, pay-
17 

ing about $300 million. There are some more details in my submitted testimony. 

But more important is that ICHEIC as an organization ceased to 

function in 2007, and the most important development since then 

is the continuing commitment of all the companies that participated in ICHEIC to process claims under relaxed standards of 

proof. That is, despite the fact that ICHEIC has closed, anyone who 

believes that an ICHEIC insurance company has failed to pay a 

claim may send his application to the company or to the Holocaust 

Claims Processing Office of the New York State Banking Department of Financial Services and that claim will be analyzed. Methods of analysis are the same as they were under the operations of 

ICHEIC, and there is no charge to the claimant, and the relaxed 

standards of proof still apply. 

The German Insurance Association has continued to report—and 

I have submitted their most recent report—on the statistics of continuing claims since ICHEIC was actually closed. They include 219 

inquiries for insurance policies of Holocaust victims as of last Monday, June 18, 2012. One hundred and two policies were identified 

in those claims; 41 were eligible for compensation, and 61 have 

been previously paid. Some claims are still being reviewed. 

Mr. Chairman, the insurance companies’ commitment to this ongoing process can be seen and can be tested by their continued outreach efforts, an example of which can be found in an advertisement they placed in the Washington Post on Monday, which is also 

attached to my statement. 

But at the same time, the fulfillment of the U.S. Government 

commitment to comprehensive and enduring legal peace, as set 

forth in the July 17, 2000, executive agreement is equally important to the continued resolution of outstanding claims, which, I will 

emphasize, were not extinguished by this agreement. 

The purpose of ICHEIC was to pay unpaid insurance claims and/ 

or provide information on insurance policies so that victims of the 

Nazis could achieve some sort of measure of justice and some closure. ICHEIC itself was not designed or intended to address the 

ongoing social needs of survivors, many of whom live in poverty 

and deprivation, as you, Mr. Chairman, have noted. 

Significantly, in 2010, the German Government greatly increased 

funding to provide 110 million euros for Holocaust survivors’ ‘‘home 

care’’. After some negotiations with the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany last year, a 3-year home care 

agreement was finalized and will provide for another 513 million 

euros, that is, $650 million for Holocaust survivors’ home care. 

These agreements, which supplement the ICHEIC process, and 

other litigation settlements will provide another measure of support for Holocaust survivors. The ICHEIC process itself represented one of many ways the United States addressed and continues to address the plight of Holocaust survivors. 

With that, I would like to say thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the 

opportunity to speak to the committee. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bindenagel appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you, Ambassador. Your entire statement will be read into the record. 
18 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. Thank you. 

Senator SCHUMER. Senator Blumenthal wants to say a few 

words, and he has been one of the big fighters for this in the Senate and always cares about issues of justice, so I would like to call 

on him for a second. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Senator Schumer, for the inspiration of your leadership, and thank you to all of the Holocaust 

survivors and their advocates who are here today. I view this hearing as tremendously and profoundly important. I am sorry that it 

is in the midst of a series of votes which may seem somewhat distracting, but I would just like to assure everyone who is here that 

the ultimate issue commands our attention, as it should, as a matter of justice, and I am very proud to join in the fight that Senator 

Schumer has so courageously waged over many, many years and 

thank him for holding this hearing. 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. 

I have a few questions, although I have to say that the testimonies of both Leo Bretholz and Renee Firestone speak for themselves, and I will hope all of my colleagues can read it because that 

says it all, and I thank the two of you particularly for your courage 

as well as the other witnesses. 

I want to ask you, Mr. Bretholz, has SNCF ever reached out to 

you in any meaningful way? 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. No. 

Senator SCHUMER. And what about some of the efforts SNCF 

made in France? And they have been met somewhat receptively by 

the French Jewish community. 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. I can really not speak for the French Jewish community, but the French Jewish community is somewhat reluctant 

to what you call rock the boat, you see, because—— 

Senator SCHUMER. I am sure there is a French expression for 

that that neither of us knows. [Laughter.] 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. You just heard what happened in Toulouse with 

the killing. 

Senator SCHUMER. Yes. 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. They are afraid if they would rock the boat, there 

will be more atrocities. 

Senator SCHUMER. Understood. 

Mr. BRETHOLZ. That is really the issue. They do not want to—— 

Senator SCHUMER. That is all too often the mentality in some of 

the European communities. Praise God it is not here in America, 

nor yours. 

OK. I want to ask Delegate Rosenberg—and I first want to commend him for his efforts in Maryland. 

Mr. ROSENBERG. Thank you. 

Senator SCHUMER. Now, as SNCF continues to obscure its role in 

the Holocaust, thanks to your legislation in Maryland we are going 

to have the historical record of a true, whole account of their 

records from that time. Are they planning to comply with your legislation, do you believe? 

Mr. ROSENBERG. Well, we do not know for sure. They have submitted a bid for the contract in Maryland, and they have submitted 

information. The State archivist, under our law, will determine 
19 

whether they have complied, whether they have given the relevant 

information, and we expect to know that within the month. 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you. 

And for you, Professor Swaine, as you know, Congress successfully passed amendments to the FSIA in the past. For example, we 

amended the FSIA to allow civil suits by U.S. victims of terrorism 

against designated state sponsors of terrorism. Additionally, we enacted legislation enabling those held hostage in the U.S. Embassy 

in Iran to bring suit in U.S. court. 

Did the Congress have the authority to enable terror victims and 

hostages to sue? And does Congress now have the authority to pass 

a narrow amendment to the FSIA as seen in the Rail Justice Act? 

Mr. SWAINE. Thank you, Senator Schumer. Congress undoubtedly has the authority as a matter of our domestic law. There is 

no question that under the Constitution Congress can do this. The 

issue that I think is worth examining in light of the values that 

Congress has previously expressed is how to make changes to the 

law compatible with international law and with our international 

interests. 

Congress has revised the FSIA to, as you say, expand the possibility of immunity—the possibility of liability for state entities that 

would otherwise consider themselves immune. Those have typically 

been very narrowly drawn, not unlike this legislation, but without 

focus on particular states or entities, rather on classes of conduct 

in general. For example, the terrorism measure focus has an administrative component to it. States have to be designated as 

‘‘sponsors of terrorism,’’ and there are other limits in it as well, including limitations based upon nationality or other identity of the 

plaintiffs. 

So Congress has in the past had sometimes internationally controversial but well-considered changes to the FSIA, and my point 

is simply to urge the same kind of focused attention to these issues. 

Senator SCHUMER. All right. Great. Thank you, Professor Swaine. 

Ms. Firestone, I want to thank you for being here and standing 

up for what you believe in so strongly, not only on behalf of yourself but other survivors. If the legislation is passed, what do you 

hope and expect to happen in court if the surviving European insurance companies are sued? 

Ms. FIRESTONE. Mr. Schumer, I do not think I will live long 

enough to finish a court session about this insurance. What I want 

and what most survivors want, we do not want to die as secondclass citizens in this country, like my parents died somewhere else. 

That is the only reason we are fighting for this. We want to have 

the same rights to go to court and claim our issues like any other 

American. 

Senator SCHUMER. And you could not be more on target in asking 

for that. You are entitled to it. 

Ms. FIRESTONE. So I hope you will fight, you will vote. 

Senator SCHUMER. We will do our best, of course. 

Now, to Ambassador Bindenagel, one of the criticisms that Ms. 

Firestone and others have made about the ICHEIC process is that 

the list of names that the companies use were not made available 

and accessible to the survivors. Can you address this issue and also 
20 

explain where the list came from, whether they were ever audited 

by someone outside of ICHEIC? 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. In fact, Senator, thank you very much for that 

question. It is a very, very important question. The 550,000 names 

actually were compiled through many ways, and I will find here in 

1 second where they were. There is a website at the Yad Vashem 

that has those names. Those names were compiled in the first instance by taking names of Jewish citizens in all of the countries 

and matching them against the lists of the companies. That is the 

basic understanding of how that list was created, and the 550,000 

names were there. That does not mean they all had policies, but 

it did mean that some of those Jewish citizens who are named had 

policies. They were checked against the companies. It was overseen 

by several other organizations in the process of making sure that 

that was a legitimate list. 

But, again, it was not everybody that had a policy but, rather, 

the list of people that could potentially have had policies. 

Senator SCHUMER. What could be done to make it better and 

more complete? 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. One of the things that would be very important—the information is really very complete as far as the historical record is that the claimants still have the opportunity to take 

that list—it is still public knowledge; it is on the website at Yad 

Vashem; it can be seen—and clamaints can still make a claim. We 

never closed off the claims process. When I checked, the companies 

have continued to keep their process open. If anything, there 

should be oversight of that process. We should look at the reports 

that come out of the insurance association. How many of the last 

219 inquiries were addressed, so that there would be an interaction 

with Holocaust survivors and heirs? They would have an opportunity to say, yes, these claims are still being processed, and also 

could work with the Holocaust Claims Processing Office in New 

York. The Holocaust Claims Processing Office has been very helpful in doing research that has been necessary for those claims. 

Senator SCHUMER. Well, again, I thank you. We have a little bit 

of difference of opinion here for sure. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. Yes. 

Senator SCHUMER. But I want to thank our first witnesses. We 

have another vote. Do you have any questions, Senator 

Blumenthal? 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I want to again express my appreciation. 

Ambassador, is it your feeling that SNCF has been held adequately 

accountable? 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. I did not deal with the SNCF argument, but 

I will tell you it never came up in the negotiations that we did with 

the Holocaust. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. But I would believe that in your view as 

someone who has a lot of experience in this area as to whether you 

feel as a matter of equity SNCF has been held adequately accountable. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. SNCF needs to be held accountable. That is my 

view. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. And has not been so far. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. They need to be accountable. 
21 

Senator SCHUMER. You can see why he was one of the best Attorneys General. 

Mr. BINDENAGEL. He is very good. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Let me turn to Professor Swaine. I do not 

mean to ask an indelicate or undiplomatic question, but are you assured that claims for anyone who passes away during the pendency 

of any litigation that may be brought, assuming that the Congress 

does act, will be adequately protected? 

Mr. SWAINE. Sir, the claim of decedents, people who inherit the 

claim? 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Correct. 

Mr. SWAINE. I am not assured of that. That would be an issue 

that would be presumably adjudicated in U.S. courts were this bill 

to pass. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Can we do something to assure that those 

interests are protected as part of what the Congress might do? 

Mr. SWAINE. Congress might attempt to address that to a degree 

that it has not previously. There are a host of domestic litigation 

issues connected with the bill that I did not address in my testimony, including the difficulty conceivably of recovering. One of the 

issues that is frequently faced in these actions is enforcing the 

judgments and simply exposing any state entity to a suit does not 

guarantee the enforceability of any judgment—which I think is in 

the past one of the reasons why diplomatic efforts have sometimes 

been preferred, because they are often a surer way of getting a foreign entity to contribute its assets to reparations than domestic litigation. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I would be interested in talking to you 

and others about those secondary issues that may arise. We do 

have another vote. I apologize that I am going to have to leave. 

Senator SCHUMER. We are going to have to close the hearing because of the other vote. It has been great. I would just like the survivors—there are many survivors here who have come to witness. 

Would you please just rise so we can acknowledge you and thank 

you? 

[Applause.] 

Senator SCHUMER. Thank you. I thank all of the witnesses and 

all of those who came. Again, we are sorry for the cramped conditions, but the record will be open for a week for people to submit 

written testimony. 

With that, the hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:53 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

[Questions and answers and submissions for the record follow.] 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
111 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164 
165 
166 
167 
168 
169 
170 
171 
172 
173 
174 
175 
176 
177 
178 
179 
180 
181 
182 
183 
184 
185 
186 
187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 

Æ