SenateS. 1884119th Congress
Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2025
Full Text
Official text as published. Use Ctrl+F / Cmd+F to search within the document.
[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1884 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]
S.1884
One Hundred Nineteenth Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Saturday,
the third day of January, two thousand and twenty six
An Act
To clarify the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, to
appropriately limit the application of defenses based on the passage of
time and other non-merits defenses to claims under that Act.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery
Act of 2025''.
SEC. 2. HOLOCAUST EXPROPRIATED ART RECOVERY ACT OF 2016 IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) In General.--The Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of
2016 (22 U.S.C. 1621 note) is amended--
(1) in section 2--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (10);
(B) by inserting after paragraph (7) the following:
``(8) The intent of this Act is to permit claims to recover
Nazi-looted art to be brought, notwithstanding the passage of time
since World War II. Some courts have frustrated the intent of this
Act by dismissing recovery lawsuits in reliance on defenses based
on the passage of time, such as laches (for example, Zuckerman v
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 928 F.3d 186 (2d Cir. 2019)) or adverse
possession, acquisitive prescription, or usucapion (for example,
Cassirer v. Thyssen-Bornemisza Foundation, 89 F.4th 1226 (9th Cir.
2024)) or on other non-merits discretionary defenses, such as the
act of state doctrine (for example, Von Saher v Norton Simon Museum
of Art at Pasadena, 897 F.3d 1141 (9th Cir. 2018)), forum non
conveniens, international comity, or prudential exhaustion. In
order to effectuate the purpose of the Act to permit claims to
recover Nazi-looted art to be resolved on the merits, these
defenses must be precluded.
``(9) This Act also is intended to allow claims in accordance
with the procedures under this Act for the recovery of artwork or
other property lost during the covered period because, or as a
result, of Nazi persecution, including by a covered government (as
defined in section 1605(h)(3)(B) of title 28, United States Code)
or an agent or associate of a covered government, regardless of the
nationality or citizenship of the alleged victim, notwithstanding
the `domestic takings' rule under Federal Republic of Germany v.
Philipp, 592 U.S. 169 (2021).''; and
(C) in paragraph (10), as so redesignated, by striking
``will yield just and fair resolutions in a more efficient and
predictable manner'' and inserting ``may, in some
circumstances, yield just and fair resolutions as well'';
(2) in section 3(2), by inserting ``and other non-merits
defenses'' after ``statutes of limitation'';
(3) in section 5--
(A) by striking subsection (g);
(B) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections
(h) and (i), respectively;
(C) by redesignating subsections (b), (c), and (d) as
subsections (c), (d), and (e), respectively;
(D) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Relation to Foreign State Immunities.--Notwithstanding any
other law or prior judicial decision, any civil claim or cause of
action covered by subsection (a) shall be deemed to be an action in
which rights in violation of international law are in issue for
purposes of section 1605(a)(3) of title 28, United States Code, without
regard to the nationality or citizenship of the alleged victim.'';
(E) in subsection (d), as so redesignated, in the matter
preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``subsection (e)'' and
inserting ``subsection (h)'';
(F) in subsection (e), as so redesignated--
(i) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking
``Subsection (a)'' and inserting ``Subsections (a), (b),
(f), and (g)''; and
(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking ``during the
period'' and all that follows and inserting ``on or after
the date of enactment of this Act.''; and
(G) by inserting after subsection (e), as so redesignated,
the following:
``(f) Defenses Based on Passage of Time and Other Non-Merits
Defenses.--With respect to any claim that is otherwise timely under
this Act--
``(1) all defenses or substantive doctrines based on the
passage of time, including laches, adverse possession, acquisitive
prescription, and usucapion, may not be applied with respect to the
claim; and
``(2) all non-merits discretionary bases for dismissal,
including the act of state doctrine, international comity, forum
non conveniens, prudential exhaustion, and similar doctrines
unrelated to the merits, may not be applied with respect to the
claim.
``(g) Nationwide Service of Process.--For a civil action brought
under subsection (a) in any State or Federal court, process may be
served in the judicial district where the case is brought or any other
judicial district of the United States where the defendant may be
found, resides, has an agent, or transacts business.''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 6. SEVERABILITY.
``If any provision of this Act, or the application of a provision
of this Act to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the
remainder of this Act, and the application of such provision to other
persons and circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall
apply with respect to any civil claim or cause of action that is--
(1) pending in any court on the date of enactment of this Act,
including any civil claim or cause of action that is pending on
appeal or for which the time to file an appeal has not expired; or
(2) filed on or after the date of enactment of this Act.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.