Obama Judge Tosses Victims’ Case In Order to Protect UNRWA’s Terror Ties To Hamas Atrocities

Peloni:  Terror can have no protections, slaughter can have no statute of limitations, and judicial mendacity must hold no relevance.

By Pamela Geller – on October 3, 2025

Judge Analisa Torres.  Photo by U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee – https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/judicial-nominations-2013-01-23 @38, Public Domain, Wikipedia

Obama Judge Analisa Torres has dismissed a high-profile lawsuit accusing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) of aiding and abetting Hamas’s October 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel.=

Victims of the Octover 7th massacre Victims have testified that they were attacked by UNWRA employees and held captive in UNWRA buildings.

Hamas Hostages Were Held in UNRWA Compounds

UNRWA is a Terrorist Organization

We mus cut funding to the UN.

As one commenter pointed out, The UN is not a country. There is no such thing as a “super-country” that can dance over the sovereignty of nations.”

Obama Judge Tosses Case Shielding UN Agency Tied To Hamas Terror

Lawsuit from 100 Israeli plaintiffs — including survivors, victims’ families, and a former hostage — said UNRWA supported Hamas.

By: Hank Berrien • Daily Wire Oct 3, 2025:

U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres has dismissed a high-profile lawsuit accusing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) of enabling Hamas’s October 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel. Filed in New York by about 100 Israeli plaintiffs—including survivors, victims’ families, and a former hostage—the case sought more than $1 billion in damages, alleging UNRWA bolstered Hamas’s terror infrastructure through indirect funding and logistical support.

The central legal issue in the case was whether UNRWA, as part of the United Nations, could be held accountable in U.S. courts. Judge Torres, a 2013 Obama appointee, ruled that UNRWA was immune from litigation under international law, stating, “Because UNRWA is a subsidiary organ of the United Nations and has not waived its immunity, this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims.”

This ruling directly contradicted the position of the Trump-era Department of Justice, which in April 2025 had submitted a brief rejecting the notion of immunity for UNRWA. That brief asserted that UNRWA had played a “significant role in the heinous offenses” committed by Hamas on October 7, in which approximately 1,200 people were killed and 250 taken hostage. It further argued that neither UNRWA nor its Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini should be protected from suit in U.S. courts.

The Trump DOJ argued that international organizations like UNRWA are not automatically entitled to immunity, stating, “The Constitution does not grant immunity to foreign sovereigns or organizations. Instead, such immunity is a matter of grace and comity.”

Get 40% off new DailyWire+ annual memberships with code FALL40 at checkout!

The lawsuit stated that UNRWA was “knowingly providing Hamas with the U.S. dollars in cash that it needed to pay smugglers for weapons, explosives and other terror materiel.” It also stated that UNRWA allegedly aided Hamas by paying staff in U.S. dollars, knowing they would have to exchange them through Hamas-linked money changers, thereby generating a steady income stream for the terror group.

Adding to the controversy, revelations in 2024 confirmed that nine UNRWA employees were fired after a U.N. internal investigation found they “may have been involved” in the October 7 attack.

Under Biden, the DOJ maintained that UNRWA remained shielded under international law and diplomatic immunity. The Trump DOJ challenged that tradition, seeking accountability for international actors accused of supporting terrorism.

Continued….