Read theMandate

Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2025Section 2 › Proposal

A findings paragraph says the claims are allowed whatever the victim's nationality

To clarify the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, to appropriately limit the application of defenses based on the passage of time and other non-merits defenses to claims under that Act, section 2, Sec. 2. Written by .

A findings paragraph says the claims are allowed whatever the victim's nationality

The document says “is amendedWho acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says

“This Act also is intended to allow claims in accordance with the procedures under this Act for the recovery of artwork or other property lost during the covered period because, or as a result, of Nazi persecution, including by a covered government (as defined in section 1605(h)(3)(B) of title 28, United States Code) or an agent or associate of a covered government, regardless of the nationality or citizenship of the alleged victim”

To clarify the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, to appropriately limit the application of defenses based on the passage of time and other non-merits defenses to claims under that Act, Sec. 2

A new paragraph (9) inserted into section 2 of the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016 (22 U.S.C. 1621 note). It states that the 2016 Act is also intended to allow claims for artwork or other property lost during the covered period because of Nazi persecution, including loss caused by a covered government as defined in section 1605(h)(3)(B) of title 28, United States Code, or by an agent or associate of one, whatever the nationality or citizenship of the alleged victim. The paragraph closes by saying this holds notwithstanding the domestic takings rule under Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp, 592 U.S. 169 (2021). This law does not state what that decision held.

What the document actually says

“This Act also is intended to allow claims in accordance with the procedures under this Act for the recovery of artwork or other property lost during the covered period because, or as a result, of Nazi persecution, including by a covered government (as defined in section 1605(h)(3)(B) of title 28, United States Code) or an agent or associate of a covered government, regardless of the nationality or citizenship of the alleged victim”

To clarify the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016, to appropriately limit the application of defenses based on the passage of time and other non-merits defenses to claims under that Act, Sec. 2
That sentence, in plain words

This law also lets people ask for art lost to Nazi harm. It does not matter what country the owner was from.

What this is about

The old law had a gap. A court said a country taking from its own people was not covered. Congress says here that those claims count too.

No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.

Share this page

How to Read This Page

The quotation is the document's own words, exactly as printed, and we check the page number against the Act itself before publishing. The paragraph underneath is our summary, not the document's words. So is the plain English version, which is why it sits beside the quotation rather than replacing it.

All proposals in this section →