Justices Are Asked to Reject POWs' Case Against Iraq
The White House says the suit stemming from the 1991 war would
undermine rebuilding.
By David G. Savage
Times Staff Writer
March 23, 2005
WASHINGTON — Bush administration lawyers urged the Supreme Court on
Tuesday to dismiss a lawsuit against Iraq brought by U.S. pilots and
soldiers who were captured and tortured by Saddam Hussein's regime
during the Persian Gulf War of 1991, saying the president believed it
could hurt the rebuilding effort in Iraq.
Courts must defer to the president's determination that a nearly
$1-billion damage award won by the former prisoners of war "would
seriously undermine funding for the essential tasks of the new Iraqi
government," Paul D. Clement, acting U.S. solicitor general, told the
justices.
The reaction to the former POWs' case, due to be
acted on by the high court next month, has rankled some military and
veterans groups. They say the administration is turning its back on
those who fought in the Gulf War.
The 17 former POWs and their
families sued Iraq under a 1996 law that opened the courthouse door to
claims against terrorist states that practice torture, bombings and
hijackings. They said they had been beaten, starved and subjected to
electric shocks when they were held as prisoners by the Iraqis. Some
emerged with broken bones as well as psychological injuries that have
yet to heal.
The lead plaintiff, Lt. Col. Clifford Acree, was
in a plane that was shot down by a surface-to-air missile Jan. 17,
1991. He ejected from his plane but suffered a neck injury. He was
taken prisoner, blindfolded and handcuffed, and then beaten until he
lost consciousness.
His nose was broken, his skull fractured, and he lost 30 pounds during
his 47 days of captivity.
Two years ago, a judge awarded the POWs nearly $1 billion in damages
and said the award could be paid with the frozen assets of Hussein's
regime.
Shortly after the verdict, the Bush administration
moved to have it thrown out, saying it interfered with U.S. plans to
rebuild a new Iraq.
The U.S. appeals court in Washington, siding with the administration,
voided the judge's verdict last year.
But the POWs appealed the issue to the Supreme Court, saying Congress
gave torture victims the right to sue "state sponsors of terror."
A bipartisan group of lawmakers also filed a brief with the high court
and argued that Congress did indeed intend to authorize such claims.
"Col. Acree and our brave American servicemen were brutally tortured
during the Gulf War, including having their bones broken and being
starved. Yet the Justice Department continues to fight against them in
court to deny their right to compensation as the law provides," said
Paul Kamenar, senior counsel for the Washington Legal Foundation.
The foundation, a conservative advocacy group, filed a
friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the members of Congress. They
included Sens. George Allen (R-Va.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Tom
Harkin (D-Iowa). The House members include California Reps. Howard L.
Berman (D-North Hollywood), Lynn C. Woolsey (D-Petaluma) and Bob Filner
(D-San Diego).
The administration was supposed to file its response in mid-February
but asked for a one-month delay.
Now that all of the briefs have been filed, the justices will probably
vote by late April on whether to hear the case, known as Acree vs. Iraq
and the U.S.
