Saudi Arabia to control entry of people from 20 countries
By: Times News Service
Muscat: A temporary suspension for entry into Saudi Arabia has been put in place for foreigners, diplomats, health practitioners and their families from 20 countries. The ban starts at 9 PM on Wednesday, the Interior Ministry of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia announced.
The Ministry of Interior was quoted by the Saudi Press Agency as announcing that a temporary suspension for entry to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been enforced on non-citizens, diplomats, health practitioners and their families coming from the Republic of Argentina, Federal Republic of Brazil, Arab Republic of Egypt, Republic of France, Federal Republic of Germany, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Ireland, Republic of Italy, Japan, Republic of Lebanon, Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Republic of Portugal, Republic of South Africa, Kingdom of Sweden, Swiss Confederation, Republic of Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom an
Reconciling transatlantic differences over Nord Stream 2
Flag of Federal Republic of Germany waving in front of the German parliament building (Reichstag) in Berlin, Germany (Katatonia82/Shutterstock)
From the time it was first proposed in 2011, the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline has divided the United States and the project’s European supporters, principally Germany. Nord Stream 2 is not simply a US-Europe issue or a US-Germany issue, however. Many in Europe, including Central and Eastern European countries, the European Parliament, and those within Germany also oppose it. The policy dispute stems in part from different perspectives on energy security. Nord Stream 2’s supporters see Russia as an economic and reliable nearby supplier of oil and gas, while the US and European critics of the project are concerned that Europe’s reliance on Russian energy supplies creates security vulnerabilities. This concern has been exacerbated by Russian aggression against Ukraine starting in 201
Supreme Court Rules for Germany in Case on Nazi-Era Art
In a unanimous ruling, the court said a federal law bars suits against foreign governments accused of expropriating their own citizens’ property.
The Guelph Treasure is a collection of medieval art that is now estimated to be worth $250 million.Credit.Gordon Welters for The New York Times
Feb. 3, 2021
WASHINGTON The Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously ruled against the heirs of Jewish art dealers in Nazi-era Frankfurt who sought to sue Germany in American courts over artifacts they say the dealers were forced to sell for a third of their value.
WASHINGTON
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday against the heirs of Jewish art dealers who suffered a huge loss after selling an important collection of medieval artifacts to Nazi leaders in Germany in the 1930s.
In a unanimous decision, the justices held that Germany is shielded by the principle of “sovereign immunity” and said federal law bars U.S. courts from deciding most legal claims involving foreign governments, except those involving “property taken in violation of international law.”
The high court agreed with Germany that this exception applies only to property taken from foreigners, not for “domestic takings.”
“This ‘domestic takings rule’ assumes that what a country does to property belonging to its own citizens within its own borders is not the subject of international law,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said for the court in Federal Republic of Germany vs. Philipp.
Supreme Court sides with Germany and Hungary in Holocaust survivors case Print this article
The Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously sided with Germany and Hungary after Holocaust survivors sought to sue the countries in U.S. courts.
In both cases,
Republic of Hungary v. Simon and
Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp, the court found that the Jewish survivors of World War II-era atrocities could not bring forward their case under human rights violation exceptions in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which limits the ways U.S. judges can deliver rulings in expropriation crimes that occurred internationally.
Chief Justice John Roberts, in the majority opinion, noted that although the court s understanding of the law supported Germany and Hungary, he nonetheless found it remarkable that the exception does not extend more broadly to Holocaust survivors, since many recent international laws were written with World War II crimes in mind.