Palestinian families are taking legal action against the U.S. State Department, seeking to halt military aid to Israel amid grave accusations of human rights violations. The lawsuit, filed on December 17, 2024, marks the first time victims of alleged human rights abuses are challenging the State Department's failure to enforce the Leahy Law, which prohibits U.S. military assistance to foreign forces implicated in such violations.
This landmark litigation involves five Palestinians, including Amal Gaza, the lead plaintiff, who has lost twenty family members due to Israel’s military operations. The case was announced at the Washington D.C. District Court and supported by the Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), founded by the late journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
The Leahy Law was implemented to prevent U.S. military aid to foreign forces accused of torturing, extrajudicial killing, and other serious human rights abuses. Nonetheless, plaintiffs assert the State Department has created numerous loopholes to continue funding the Israeli military. Human rights groups have accused Israel of war crimes, particularly following the outbreak of conflict on October 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked Israel, prompting retaliatory actions resulting in mass casualties.
“This lawsuit demands one thing and one thing only: for the State Department to obey the law requiring a ban on assistance to abusive Israeli security forces,” stated Sarah Leah Whitson, DAWN's Executive Director. The legal complaint argues for the enforcement of the law, which prohibits providing U.S. assistance to foreign security forces implicated in gross violations of human rights.
Documents behind the lawsuit assert the State Department under Secretary Antony Blinken has deliberately ignored evidence of abuses, failing to cut ties with certain Israeli military units known to have committed serious violations. The war has seen upwards of 45,000 Palestinian deaths, and the horrific impact on civilians has escalated calls for accountability.
Ahmed Moor, one of the plaintiffs from Pennsylvania, expressed frustration over the U.S. government's military support, highlighting the devastating effects on his relatives who have been displaced multiple times. “It’s really a modest set of goals here: There’s a U.S. law. We’d like the federal government to adhere to U.S. law,” Moor said.
The complaint details alleged obstacles set by the State Department, including the creation of the Israel Leahy Vetting Forum, described as obstructive and biased against effectively addressing gross human rights violations. Critics argue this unique processing enables Israel's military and police units to receive U.S. funds, regardless of documented atrocities.
One plaintiff, Shawan Jabarin, director of the Palestinian human rights organization Al-Haq, spoke of the pervasive abuses Palestinians face under the barrage of Israeli military operations. “If the State Department had done its job and sanctioned U.S.-funded Israeli military units for arbitrarily detaining Palestinians for years without evidence or charge... it could have prevented my suffering,” Jabarin stated.
The ramifications of this litigation could extend beyond the individual plaintiffs, potentially reshaping U.S. foreign policy toward Israel and encouraging more comprehensive application of the Leahy Law. Raed Jarrar, DAWN's Advocacy Director, emphasized the necessity for legal mechanisms to enforce existing laws: “Complying with the Leahy Law is not a 'political question' for executive branch discretion, but strict legal requirements imposed by Congress on the State Department.”
This lawsuit, geared toward compelling the U.S. government to abide by its regulations, reflects broader discontent with American military support for Israel and the perceived complicity of the State Department amid rising violence and human rights violations.
The results of this lawsuit could yield significant political consequences, as it challenges the long-held narrative of unwavering support for Israel amid mounting evidence of human rights abuses. If the court rules favorably for the plaintiffs, it may compel the State Department to reassess its approach to military assistance, potentially re-evaluing relationships with foreign military units involved in human rights violations.
While the State Department has declined to comment on the pending lawsuit, the growing pressure from within and outside the United States for accountability suggests this legal challenge is part of an enduring push for justice and adherence to international law. The actions taken now may reverberate through future U.S.-Israel relations and impact broader discussions on human rights and military aid across the globe.
