DOJ Antitrust Chief Rejects Political Fast-Track for Paramount-Skydance Deal 
Bank of America's $72.5M Epstein Settlement: What You Need to Know 
SK Hynix Eyes Up to $14 Billion U.S. IPO to Fund AI Chip Expansion 
FEMA Reinstates $1 Billion Disaster Prevention Grant Program After Court Order 
Star Entertainment Secures $390M Refinancing Deal to Stabilize Operations 
CK Hutchison's Panama Ports Dispute Escalates as Arbitration Claims Surpass $2 Billion 
Estée Lauder Sues Jo Malone Over Trademark Dispute Involving Zara 
Meta Ties Executive Pay to Aggressive Stock Price Targets in Major Retention Push 
SpaceX IPO Filing Expected This Week as Valuation Could Surpass $75 Billion 
Nanya Technology Shares Surge 10% After $2.5 Billion Private Placement from Sandisk and Cisco 
Cybersecurity Stocks Tumble After Anthropic's Claude Mythos AI Leak Sparks Market Fears 
Valero Port Arthur Refinery Explosion Prompts $1M Lawsuit Over Worker Safety Negligence 
Reflection AI Eyes $25 Billion Valuation in Massive $2.5 Billion Funding Round 
Lynas Rare Earths Signs Vietnam Deal with LS Eco Energy to Boost Magnet Metal Production 
UBS Seeks Legal Protection Over Credit Suisse's Nazi-Era Banking Activities 
Federal Judge Blocks Pentagon's Restrictive Press Access Policy 
Federal Reserve Crisis: DOJ Standoff Threatens Powell's Succession and Rate Stability 
A U.S. federal judge has dismissed two lawsuits that sought to hold Standard Chartered Bank responsible for indirectly supporting terrorist groups linked to deadly attacks in Israel and Iraq between 2010 and 2019.
U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett, based in Manhattan, ruled that the plaintiffs—90 individuals, including victims, relatives, and representatives—failed to plausibly show that the British multinational bank “knowingly and substantially assisted” the attacks. The lawsuits, Fraenkel et al v. Standard Chartered Bank and Brauner et al v. Standard Chartered Bank, were filed under the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).
The plaintiffs claimed that Standard Chartered provided financial and logistical services to Iran’s central bank, sanctioned financial institutions, companies, and individuals that supported militant organizations such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and Jaysh al-Mahdi. Allegedly, this included transferring billions of dollars despite repeated warnings from U.S. counterterrorism officials.
While Judge Garnett acknowledged that Standard Chartered had “engaged in some wrongdoing” by helping clients evade U.S. sanctions, she ruled that there was no “direct nexus” between the bank’s conduct and the terrorist attacks. She emphasized that “even under the most generous reading of the allegations there are several steps between any conduct by SCB and the actions of those who directly perpetrated the attacks.”
In its defense, Standard Chartered stated in court filings that it “did not commit any acts of terrorism and did not support any terrorist or attack.” Lawyers representing the plaintiffs and Standard Chartered did not immediately respond to media requests for comment.
The dismissal represents a significant legal win for Standard Chartered, shielding it from liability under JASTA, which allows victims of terrorism to sue entities accused of providing material support. The ruling may also set a precedent in similar cases involving international banks accused of indirect ties to terrorism financing.
