AstraZeneca UK Limited, et al. v. Joshua Atchley, et al.

The Antiterrorism Act (ATA) gives U.S. nationals injured “by reason of an act of international terrorism” causes of action for direct liability against the perpetrators and aiding-and-abetting liability against persons who “culpably participate” in the perpetrator’s terrorist act. Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh, 598 U.S. 471, 506 (2023); see 18 U.S.C. § 2333(a), (d)(2). Petitioners (defendants below) are twenty-one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical and medical-device companies. During the post-Saddam reconstruction of Iraq, they supplied medicines and medical goods to the U.S.- backed Iraqi Health Ministry at the request of the U.S. government, which was eager to rebuild the Iraqi healthcare system. Plaintiffs allege that a militia infiltrated the Ministry and diverted goods and payments into its coffers, and that the militia then committed attacks that injured plaintiffs. Although plaintiffs never alleged that defendants’ goods directly contributed to any specific attacks or that defendants intended to aid any attacks, the D.C. Circuit allowed plaintiffs to pursue ATA claims for both direct liability and aiding-and-abetting liability for every act of terrorism the militia committed across Iraq over a span of six years. The questions presented are:

1. Whether the ATA authorizes liability for aiding and abetting acts of terror based on aid that is (1) neither tied to any specific attack nor systemic and pervasive and

2. provided without any desire to help the attacks succeed.

3. Whether the ATA’s proximate cause requirement authorizes direct liability for acts of terror based on allegations that defendants transacted with a foreign-government agency that performed legitimate functions.