You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

People of Bikini Ex Rel. kili/bikini/ejit Local and Government Council v. United States

Citations: 554 F.3d 996; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 1539; 2009 WL 205021Docket: 2007-5175

Court: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; January 28, 2009; Federal Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by the People of Bikini and Enewetak Atoll against the United States, seeking compensation under the Fifth Amendment for the taking of land due to nuclear testing conducted in the mid-20th century. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the claims by the Court of Federal Claims, based on the Section 177 Agreement, part of the Compact of Free Association between the U.S. and the Marshall Islands. This agreement established a Nuclear Claims Tribunal with allocated funds to settle claims, but its funding has been insufficient to meet awarded compensations. The court found that the agreement explicitly precludes U.S. courts from having jurisdiction over these claims, framing the issue as a political question beyond judicial authority. The ruling emphasized Congress's authority to limit court jurisdiction and noted that any remedy through changed circumstances petitions to Congress remains beyond judicial reach. Consequently, the appellate court upheld the dismissal of the case, underscoring the binding nature of the Section 177 Agreement and the nonjusticiable nature of the claims presented. This decision reflects the court's adherence to statutory interpretation and jurisdictional limitations imposed by international agreements.

Legal Issues Addressed

Changed Circumstances Petition

Application: The Section 177 Agreement allows for a 'Changed Circumstances' petition to Congress for additional funding, but such petitions do not obligate Congress to allocate funds.

Reasoning: The 'Changed Circumstances' provision clarifies that the U.S. Congress is not obligated to authorize or appropriate funds as per the Section 177 Agreement, Art. IX.

Consent to Be Sued and Waiver of Right to Litigate

Application: The claimants waived their right to litigate in U.S. courts, and the U.S. government withdrew consent to be sued for these claims, resulting in a lack of jurisdiction.

Reasoning: This reflects both the U.S. government's withdrawal of consent to be sued regarding these claims and the claimants' waiver of their right to litigate in U.S. courts.

Jurisdiction Withdrawal under the Section 177 Agreement

Application: The Section 177 Agreement conclusively withdraws U.S. court jurisdiction over claims related to the Nuclear Testing Program, mandating dismissal of such claims.

Reasoning: The Section 177 Agreement serves as a comprehensive settlement for all claims related to the Nuclear Testing Program, stating that no U.S. court has jurisdiction over such claims, which must be dismissed.

Nonjusticiable Political Questions Doctrine

Application: Claims regarding compensation for nuclear testing impacts are considered nonjusticiable political questions, thus outside the jurisdiction of the courts.

Reasoning: Challenges to this arrangement, raised by the Plaintiffs–Appellants (the People of Enewetak), constitute a political question beyond judicial authority.