Looted Nazi Art Again Before Supreme Court

Enlarge this image


The medieval Dome Reliquary (13th century) of the Guelph Treasure is displayed at the Bode Museum in Berlin. It’s part of collection of priceless artwork that finds itself at the center of a legal argument at the Supreme Court.





Markus Schreiber/AP



hide caption



toggle caption


Markus Schreiber/AP





Enlarge this image


Saemy Rosenberg and his wife, Lisellotte, are seen with an unnamed man. Saemy Rosenberg was forced to sell his priceless art collection to the Nazis. Now, his grandson wants the Supreme Court to intervene.





Courtesy of Jed Leiber



hide caption



toggle caption


Courtesy of Jed Leiber




Saemy Rosenberg and his wife, Lisellotte, are seen with an unnamed man. Saemy Rosenberg was forced to sell his priceless art collection to the Nazis. Now, his grandson wants the Supreme Court to intervene.


Courtesy of Jed Leiber

In the Supreme Court Monday, the German government, backed by the Trump administration, argued that foreign governments and their agencies are shielded from lawsuits under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

But Leiber’s lawyer, Nicholas O’Donnell, contended that this suit and others like it are specific exceptions under the law because, as he put it, «The Nazi government set out explicitly to destroy the German Jewish people by taking their property. And Congress has specifically identified the Nazis’ looting of art from the Jewish people as genocidal. This is not a human rights case, he maintained, but a property rights case.

But justices both liberal and conservative, justices who are Jewish and those who are not, seemed doubtful.

Wouldn’t your reading amount to «a radical departure in the way the law is interpreted, asked Justice Clarence Thomas.

Justice Stephen Breyer said that O’Donnell’s argument seemed to have «no limit.

«Terrible things happen in this world, he noted, adding that the list of terribles «goes on and on. And if we can bring court cases in the U.S. for those things, «can these other countries do the same and accuse us? he said, citing the «Japanese internment, which involved 30,000 people in World War II. Breyer said that’s why, in his view, commissions set up to deal with these kinds of questions may work better.

In an interview, O’Donnell said that while the Austrian government surprised many after the Altmann case by setting up a commission that has settled with hundreds of Jewish heirs in cases involving Nazi art theft, Germany has not.

«Germany, a much larger country with a much more central role in the events in question has handled just 17 such cases, he says.

He adds that the archival records of the sale in this case tell a dark tale. When the Nazis were talking among themselves, he says, it is clear what they were doing. Nazi officials «were talking in very overt terms about the undervaluing of the collection they were targeting. In fact, he notes, any museum that wanted to offer a fair price was simply waved off.

In the end, Saemy Rosenberg, Leiber’s grandfather, would flee with his wife and their daughter to the United states where he would rebuild his life as an art dealer. The other two owners would not fare as well. Julius Goldschmidt escaped to London, a broken man. And Z.M. Hackenbroch was beaten to death by a Nazi mob in Frankfurt.

It’s not clear what Jed Lieber and the other heirs ultimately want, or would settle for. The Guelph Treasure is valued at $250 million. At the very least, Leiber says he wants an acknowledgment.

«The story about how it came to be in that museum [in Berlin] is important to me, he says. «My grandfather needs to be part of that story and how it was recovered.

In the lower court, Leiber won the right to sue, but based on the tone of Monday’s argument, his odds for preserving that victory at the Supreme Court look iffy.