U.S. Justice Department Declares UNRWA No Longer Immune from Legal Accountability in American Courts

By: Fern Sidman

In a historic shift with far-reaching legal and diplomatic consequences, the U.S. Department of Justice has informed the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) no longer enjoys legal immunity in U.S. courts. The decision, announced Thursday, comes amid a high-profile lawsuit filed by families of victims of the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led terrorist massacre in southern Israel. The plaintiffs allege that UNRWA played a significant role in facilitating the atrocities—accusations that, if proven in court, could lead to immense financial and institutional repercussions.

According to a report that appeared on Friday in The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS), this legal development stems from a case launched last year, which seeks justice for those murdered or harmed during the deadliest single-day assault on Jews since the Holocaust. Plaintiffs argue that UNRWA aided and abetted terrorism, citing not only direct participation by agency employees in the attacks, but also alleging decades-long fraud and corruption in the handling of financial aid—some $1 billion of which may have ended up in the coffers of Hamas and other terror organizations in Gaza.

In a sharp reversal of previous U.S. policy, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York now holds that UNRWA cannot hide behind diplomatic immunity to avoid facing allegations in American courts. In a letter to District Judge Analisa Torres, the Justice Department acknowledged the gravity of the allegations, stating: “The complaint in this case alleges atrocious crimes committed by Hamas on Oct. 7, and its factual allegations, taken as true, detail how UNRWA played a significant role in those heinous offenses.”

The JNS report indicated that the letter further emphasized that while past administrations, including President Joe Biden’s, maintained that UNRWA and the United Nations were protected by blanket immunity, that interpretation has now been reconsidered.

“The government has since re-evaluated that position and now concludes that UNRWA is not immune from this litigation. Nor are the bulk of other defendants,” the filing stated.

As JNS reported, a cornerstone of the DOJ’s new position lies in the argument that UNRWA is not legally an organ of the United Nations, despite its long-standing association. Rather, it is an entity created by a resolution of the UN General Assembly, and the Justice Department questioned whether the General Assembly even possessed the legal authority to create such an agency under international law. This finding has potential implications not only for UNRWA’s future operations, but also for the structure and reach of U.N. immunity protections globally.

The legal exposure facing UNRWA is now substantial. Should the court find it culpable, UNRWA leaders, staff, and possibly the United Nations itself could be held liable for massive compensatory damages. Victims’ families could be awarded significant settlements for what they describe as the agency’s complicity in crimes against humanity.

Moreover, the JNS report emphaiszed that this ruling could reshape the legal landscape surrounding international organizations operating on U.S. soil. Questions are now being raised about whether this could jeopardize the legal protections of the United Nations headquarters in New York City, potentially affecting the entire U.N. diplomatic presence in the United States.

The ruling may also reinforce recent moves by the Israeli government, which in January 2025 officially banned UNRWA from operating in Israeli-controlled areas, citing evidence that at least 18 of its staff members actively participated in the October 7 massacre, as was reported by JNS. Israeli officials have long accused the agency of operating as a de facto arm of Hamas, offering educational programming steeped in antisemitic and violent content, and allowing U.N.-branded facilities to be co-opted by terror groups.

In response to the DOJ’s letter, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres’s office issued a carefully worded statement to JNS, emphasizing that the United Nations maintains a “longstanding and clear” position: “UNRWA is a subsidiary body of the General Assembly and, as such, is entitled to immunity from legal process under the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.”

A spokesperson for UNRWA echoed the same position, reiterating the agency’s intent to assert its immunity through legal counsel and review the DOJ’s position before considering next steps. “We will consider whether any other action is appropriate with respect to the letter,” the U.N. Secretary-General’s office told JNS.

This legal ruling, as the JNS report aptly noted, marks an unprecedented moment of accountability for a U.N. body long mired in controversy, yet largely shielded from judicial scrutiny. For decades, critics of UNRWA—including Israeli officials, Western lawmakers, and watchdog organizations—have accused it of perpetuating the refugee crisis, indoctrinating youth, and acting as a channel for terror financing. Now, for the first time, the veil of immunity may be lifted, and UNRWA may finally have to answer for its alleged role in the bloodshed of October 7.

Whether the court ultimately finds UNRWA guilty remains to be seen. But as the JNS report highlighted, the very fact that the agency must now stand trial could represent a seismic shift in how international organizations are held accountable for crimes committed under the cloak of humanitarian work.