Bill to Help Survivor Win Reparations Dies in Congress at End of Its Session

An 11th-hour compromise in the House of Representatives almost helped Holocaust survivor Hugo Princz earn his elusive goal: obtaining compensation from Germany for his suffering during World War II.

But after passing the House in a voice vote, the bill that would have allowed Princz to sue the German for reparations failed to make it to the Senate before Congress ended its session.

The bill was a last-ditch effort by the 71-year-old Princz, who has been denied reparations by Germany because of his status as a U.S. citizen during World War II.

Born in Slovakia to a naturalized American father, his status did not protect him from being sent to Nazi concentration camps, where most of his family perished.

Rescued by American soldiers at the end of the war and sent to a U.S. Army hospital, he bypassed Allied displaced persons camps and was thus not registered as a Holocaust victim. Germany later rejected his claims because, as a U.S. citizen, he was not considered a stateless refugee.

Princz’s battle for reparations began in court. Standing in his way is the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, which limits the rights of U.S. citizens to bring suit against foreign governments.

A federal court judge ruled that Princz, a resident of Highland Park, N.J., can sue Germany, but the German government successfully appealed the decision.

Then supporters tried another route. Teaming up with victims of torture, specifically U.S. citizens who had been held hostage by terrorists in Arab countries, a movement began in Congress to amend the act.

OPPOSITION FROM STATE DEPARTMENT

The amended version, introduced by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Rep. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), when reconciled in conference, allowed U.S. citizens who are subjected to torture, genocide or extra judicial killing abroad to sue the responsible governments.

The bill’s supporters had hoped to get the legislation onto the floor of both houses of Congress before the fall recess but ran into opposition from the State Department and from some members of Congress.

Since the beginning of the debate, the State Department has expressed concern over diplomatic implications of amending the act, contending that such a move could open the door for other countries to mirror the law and allow frivolous suits against the United States.

Nonetheless, Bill Marks, Princz’s attorney, felt assured the bill would have had the necessary votes to pass.

The hitch was, it was the end of the session when “you essentially need unanimous consent to bring something up.”

One of the holdouts was Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Fla.), who said in a statement: “Simply stated, the risks that other nations will greatly expand their exception to the doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity should (the bill) become law are greater than the benefit to the few individuals who would be helped by it.”

Proponents made a deal. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) introduced a new version of the bill that narrowed the scope so that it only addressed Princz’s case.

The narrow version limited the right to sue to the victims of genocidal acts during World War II. They may sue only “the predecessor states of the Federal Republic of Germany” or “any territories or areas occupied or otherwise controlled by those states” during World War II.

The bill made clear, Frank said, that it applied “only to past events.” McCollum got on board. Supporters — including Schumer, Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.)–spoke to the State Department, which agreed not to block the narrowly constructed bill. Passage in the House was unanimous.

But the bill never made it to the Senate floor, most likely because of procedural rather than substantive issues, asserted Marks, Princz’s attorney. There simply was no time.

There was, however, some opposition to the broader bill from the Senate, notably from Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.). Few were willing to speculate what happened to the narrow bill there.

There is, however, another session. And one after that. And so on. “Germany needs to understand,” Marks said, “that this bill is on an express train for passage. It only got derailed for a minute. It is going to pass.”