"The Potential Impact of Terrorism Lawsuits Under the Antiterrorism Act on Ordinary Corporate, Banking and Sovereign Enterprises," 27 May 2020

U.S. Congress has enacted several laws enabling victims of terrorism to seek damages…the Antiterrorism Act of 1990 (ATA) [has been expanded] to create secondary liability for any entity or person that knowingly “aids or abets” a terrorist act.

…[S]econdary ATA liability has created an opening for plaintiffs to sue private entities in various contexts. One well-publicized category of secondary ATA liability cases relates to financial institutions alleged to have provided banking services to customers that turn out to have had terrorist links.

…Other scenarios that have given rise to alleged ATA claims involve:

• health care providers that provided medical goods or services to foreign governments that were later accused of terrorist attacks;
• companies that made “protection payments” to protect their employees against attacks from regional guerrilla organizations (e.g., FARC in Colombia);
• companies that offer mobile telephony services in regions where armed groups (e.g., the Taliban) operate; and
• social media companies alleged to have provided platforms to terrorists.

None of these scenarios has, to date, resulted in a final ATA judgment against a private company…Being named as a defendant in an ATA case will have a significant reputational impact not just on the defendants concerned, but also on those who conduct business with them.