Not surprising

Submitted by GW (United States), Nov 15, 2007 at 11:02

Justice should be blind and absolute, and not relative to the involved parties, in this case the plaintiffs and the Iranian government.

That said, the U.S. Government has an interest in not setting a precedent allowing seizure of a government's assets by some civil plaintiff on American soil. This could justify a similar action whereby the Iranian Government would seize American assets in Iran, or attempt to do so elsewhere.

While the American justice system is basically fair and equitable, the justice system in Iran is not - recall the case of the photographer Kazemi, to name one case. One can easily imagine a scenario where based on trumped up charges and an unfair trial, the Iranian Government would justify its seizure of American assets. And this could happen not only in Iran, but in other countries unfriendly to the American Government. And with a significant American presence all over the world, the U.S. has much more exposure to lawsuit and seizure than the Iranians.

While I sympathise greatly with the plaintiffs, one cannot be surprised by the U.S. Government's preemption of the results of the decisions of the U.S. courts.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".