US victims of Intifada want Supreme Court to review case that sues NatWest
Group of 200 Americans whose family members were hurt in the uprising continue legal battle against the National Westminster (NatWest) Bank, part of the Royal Bank of Scotland
More than 15 years have passed since the end of the Second Intifada, but some American victims of the terror attacks from that period have not given up on their legal battle to hold a British bank accountable for allegedly aiding the terrorists responsible.
A group of about 200 Americans with family members harmed in the early 2000s attacks in Israel are asking the Supreme Court to review a decision by a federal appeals court decision from April of this year. The appeals court dismissed their suit against the bank due to lack of evidence that the bank “funded terrorist attacks or recruited persons to carry out such attacks,” or received any indication that the bank transfers were made for the purpose of terrorism.
Several Jewish organisations, including Agudath Israel, the Anti-Defamation League, Hadassah and the Orthodox Union, filed an amicus brief last week on behalf of the terror victims. Another amicus brief was filed by a group U.S. senators from both parties, including Chuck Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand, Marco Rubio and Joni Ernst.
The group originally sued the National Westminster Bank, part of the Royal Bank of Scotland, in 2005 over claims that a charity called Interpal, which held accounts at the bank, was acting as a fundraising arm for Hamas — the Palestinian group that governs the Gaza Strip and is designated a terrorist group by the U.S. and Israel.
U.S. authorities had also designated Interpal as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist organisation, but the federal appeals judge still dismissed the case.
In 2014, the United States Second Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act required plaintiffs to show that the bank knew or was indifferent to Interpal’s support for Hamas, “irrespective of whether Interpal’s support aided terrorist activities of the terrorist organisation,” according to Reuters. But in April 2021, the same appeals court dismissed the case for lack of evidence that Interpal “funded terrorist attacks or recruited persons to carry out such attacks,” and “Interpal did not indicate to NatWest that the transfers were for any terroristic purpose.”
The Second Intifada, or Palestinian uprising, began in fall of 2000 and led to the deaths of thousands of Israelis and Palestinians.
Keep community journalism free.
Jewish News is free for everyone. No paywall. No barriers. Just trusted journalism for anyone who wants to stay connected to Jewish life in Britain.
If you value that, please support us.
From as little as £5 a month, you can help keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Every day, we report on the issues that matter to our community. We celebrate achievements, support charities, challenge antisemitism and ensure Jewish voices are heard more widely.
From as little as £5 a month, you can help us continue to:
- Report on the stories shaping Jewish life in the UK and beyond
- Bring our community together through shared stories, events and campaigns
- Celebrate the people, culture and moments that define our community
- Support organisations doing vital work across Jewish Britain
You can make a one-off donation or become a regular supporter. Every contribution helps keep our journalism free, independent and accessible to all.
If everyone who values Jewish News gave a small amount, it would make a real difference to our future.






















