Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act

Floor Speech

Break in Transcript

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

It is nice to see a Tennessean in the chair. James Knox Polk might have been the last one who was more permanent as Speaker of the House. Yes, it is good to see you.

To my friend, Mr. Chabot, it is an honor to rise and to cosponsor this bill with you and with Mr. Goodlatte and Mr. Conyers.

Madam Speaker, I do rise in support of H.R. 4292, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act, also known as the FCEJIC Act.

This makes a modest, but important amendment to the expropriation exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976.

Specifically, it ensures that foreign states are immune from suits for damages concerning the ownership of cultural property when that property is in the United States pursuant to an agreement between the foreign state and the U.S. or a U.S.-based cultural or educational institution, when the President has granted the work at issue immunity from seizure pursuant to the Immunity from Seizure Act, and when the President's grant of immunity from seizure is published in the Federal Register.

The expropriation exception remains available to all claims concerning misappropriated cultural property to which these factual circumstances do not apply.

Additionally, H.R. 4292 ensures that the expropriation exception remains available for all Nazi-era claims. This is appropriate in light of the particularly concerted effort of the Nazis to seize artwork and other cultural property from citizens at that time, victims of the Holocaust and others.

There have been quite a few movies recently about some of the people in our armed services who helped rescue some of that artwork, which is to be commended, and it really brought out the horrific things in that area that the Nazis did. They did so many horrific things, but they just wanted to destroy all culture, so any artwork that might be part of those claims would still be available.

With this finely and narrowly tailored amendment, we will have more opportunities to see art from Europe and from around the world. It is important to have exchanges of culture, so that people around the world understand the other cultures and so that it maybe makes the planet a little more safe. I support the bill as I understand that it still makes available redress for those who committed acts of expropriation during the Nazi era.

I thank Mr. Chabot, who is my friend and who has done a great job, and we hope to keep the river flowing and the Delta Queen alive. I thank the Judiciary Committee chairman, Bob Goodlatte, and our ranking member, the esteemed John Conyers, for their leadership.

I urge the House to pass the bill, and I would like to offer for the Record a letter from the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, which speaks for itself, and for the American Jewish Congress in their stating that they would not oppose the passage of this bill.

CONFERENCE ON JEWISH MATERIAL

CLAIMS AGAINST GERMANY, INC.

New York, NY, December 19, 2013.
Mr. TIMOTHY RUB,
President, Association of Art Museum Directors, The George D. Widener Director and CEO, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, PA.

Dear Mr. Rub, Anita Difanis has now sent us the language of the most recent draft of the immunity bill (the ``Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act'') that the AAMD is asking be introduced to the Congress. We have reviewed the points that concerned us, namely those in regard to Nazi Era claims.

While we are not persuaded of the need for this special legislation, we have no objection to it. The American Jewish Committee concurs with this view.

Sincerely yours,

Greg Schneider,
Executive Vice-President.

Mr. COHEN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Break in Transcript

Source