The Court of Appeals in New York has heard arguments from lawyers representing families of 9/11 victims and the government of Saudi Arabia. The court is deciding whether the families' long-running legal case against Saudi Arabia can move to trial.
The families allege that Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi government employee, knowingly supported two of the 9/11 hijackers and was part of a network linked to the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs. Mr. Bayoumi, now retired, has denied any knowledge of the men being hijackers or involvement in the attacks. Saudi Arabia has stated that any allegation of its or its officials' complicity in 9/11 is false.
Saudi Arabia has argued that it is immune from prosecution in US courts as a foreign sovereign state. However, in 2016, the US Congress passed the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which permits civil claims against foreign states for international terrorism. In August 2025, the Manhattan District Court ruled that the 9/11 families had sufficient evidence to meet JASTA's terms, allowing the case to proceed towards a trial.
On Wednesday, Saudi Arabia asked the Court of Appeals to reverse the District Court's decision. Counsel Gregory Rapawy argued that core factual issues, including the nature of Mr. Bayoumi's employment, had not been decided and needed to be before immunity could be removed. Gavin Simpson, a lawyer for the 9/11 families, contended that the District Court had already found Mr. Bayoumi's actions were not innocent and that he was following Saudi Arabia's instructions when assisting the hijackers.
Judge William Nardini concluded the hearing by stating, "it's a difficult case, and we will take it under advisement," indicating that a ruling would be issued at a future date.