Plaintiffs have a heavy burden to prove that the provision of routine financial services to suspected terrorists violated the ATA. While plaintiffs clearly met their burden in the Arab Bank case, that case did not involve the provision of routine banking services. Further, in the Palestinian Authority case several of the individuals who committed the terrorist attacks worked for the authority and were monetarily rewarded for their acts of terrorism.
Plaintiffs' lawyers in pending bank cases filed under the ATA therefore should be hesitant to read too much into the Arab Bank and Palestinian Authority verdicts.
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/jimmy_gurule/68/