The decision could see the UN agency, which has been accused of employing Hamas operatives, hit with significant claims from the relatives of terror victims
April 25, 2025 10:50
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced the reversal of a Biden-era policy that gave legal immunity to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (Unrwa).
In a letter to Analisa Torres, the judge presiding over a case in New. York against Unrwa, the DOJ withdrew its provision for legal immunity and even suggested that the agency had been founded unlawfully.
Huge breaking: In a major reversal of the Biden admin’s position, the Trump DOJ now says @UNRWA has no immunity from U.S. lawsuits—opening the door to massive claims by Hamas victims.
— Eitan Fischberger (@EFischberger) April 25, 2025
The DOJ also questions whether UNRWA was legally created in the first place 🧵 pic.twitter.com/hSOghcvJeA
Under the Biden administration, the US had adopted the position that Unrwa was protected from lawsuits in federal courts from US citizens regarding its operations in Gaza.
The organisation has long faced allegations that it has been infiltrated by Hamas, including claims that some of its workers participated in the October 7, 2023 terror attacks and that some of the hostages taken that day were subsequently held in its facilities.
However, Trump administration’s about turn opens the way for relatives of terror victims to sue Unrwa in the US court system if they can prove that the agency was linked a particular attack.
Not only could this potentially result in sizeable damages claim against Unrwa, but successful suits would also establish its alleged links with Hamas as a matter of legal record.
In its filing, the DOJ wrote: “Previously, the government expressed the view that certain immunities shielded Unrwa from having to answer those allegations in American courts.
"The government has since reevaluated that position and now concludes Unraw is not immune from this litigation.
"The Constitution does not grant immunity to foreign sovereigns or organisations.”
Elsewhere in the letter, the department also indicated that Unrwa may, in its opinion, have been founded unlawfully when it was established in 1949.
It added: “It is highly doubtful that the UN Charter even authorises the General Assembly to create a subsidiary organ such as Unrwa, because its functions are not the type of functions performed by the General Assembly.”
The change in policy is particularly noteworthy given its relation to one of the cases set to be decided by the US Supreme Court in the coming weeks.
In its judgement on Fuld v PLO, the court will decide whether the US has the jurisdiction to hear similar lawsuits regarding the Palestinian Authority (PA).
Specifically, it will determine whether American relatives of terror victims can sue the PA for providing financial assistance to their loved ones’ attackers through its so-called ‘pay for slay’ scheme, which sees Palestinians convicted of violent crimes given a monthly allowance while in prison.
According to analysis of oral arguments from SCOTUSblog, the majority-conservative court appears inclined to rule in favour of allowing such suits to be brought. The decision is expected to be announced before the end of the court’s current session on June 26.