Opposition to the State Department’s Motion to Dismiss
United States of America
Armed Conflict in Yemen, Armed Conflict in Libya
United Arab Emirates
Download documentsOpposition to motion to dismiss, 18.06.21
The plaintiffs reassert that they are merely seeking to hold the government to its procedural obligations rather than challenging its foreign policy decisions.nnn
In particular, the plaintiffs challenge the State Department’s jurisdictional arguments, which claimed that this is a non-justiciable matter as no one can challenge the executive’s decision to sell arms to another country because it involves foreign policy and national security questions. It is submitted that the individual survivors of the air strikes remain at risk of harm at the hands of the UAE and this is clearly substantiated based on evidence of its ongoing behaviour in Yemen and Libya, rather than merely ‘speculative’ harm as argued by the government . The government’s argument regarding the justiciability of this complaint is also challenged, as it is clarified that the claimants are not challenging the foreign policy or national security decisions of the executive, but are merely seeking to hold the State Department to its procedural obligations, namely to provide a reasoned justification for any change in policy.
Read the State Department’s motion to dismiss here.