Nazi-Looted Art Claims Get a Boost: New Law Blocks Time-Based Defenses in Restitution Cases

This legislation strengthens the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016 by explicitly removing procedural roadblocks that have long prevented victims’ families from recovering stolen art. Essentially, the bill ensures that lawsuits seeking the return of art looted by the Nazis must be decided based on whether the property was actually stolen, not on legal technicalities. It achieves this by blocking courts from dismissing these claims based on the passage of time or other non-merits defenses, and it applies these new rules immediately to both new and ongoing cases.

No More 'Too Late to Sue' Excuses

The biggest change here is that the bill slams the door shut on defenses that rely on the clock running out. Think of it like this: if your grandfather’s car was stolen in 1950, a regular lawsuit today might get tossed out because too much time has passed—that’s the statute of limitations. For Holocaust art claims, this bill blocks similar defenses like laches (the legal idea that you waited too long to file) or adverse possession (the claim that the current owner has owned it long enough to make it legally theirs). The legislation states courts cannot use these time-based excuses to dismiss a claim that is otherwise timely under the Act. This means the current possessor can’t just say, “It’s been too long,” and walk away; they have to defend the merits of their title.

Cutting Through the Legal Red Tape

Beyond time limits, the bill also targets other procedural defenses that let defendants avoid the core issue of theft. It blocks non-merits defenses like the “act of state doctrine” (which argues a foreign government’s actions shouldn’t be judged in a U.S. court) and “forum non-conveniens” (the argument that the case should be heard in a different country). For the heirs of victims, who have often struggled for decades to prove ownership, this is huge. It means the legal fight will now focus squarely on the historical facts: was this art stolen during the Nazi era, and does the claimant have the right to it? Furthermore, the bill clarifies that these claims can be brought regardless of whether the original victim was a U.S. citizen, ensuring a wider range of victims can seek justice.

The Immediate Impact for Current Cases

In a move that will shake up existing litigation, these new rules apply immediately to any lawsuit that is currently active, including those already on appeal. This means if a family’s claim was previously dismissed based on a time-limit defense that is now blocked, they may get a second chance to argue their case. While this is a clear win for claimants, it does introduce complexity for defendants who may have relied on these established defenses in ongoing lawsuits, potentially upending cases that were nearing final resolution. For the current holders of the art—whether private collectors or museums—this change significantly raises the risk that their title could be successfully challenged, even decades after acquisition.