[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 53 (Thursday, April 7, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1812-S1813]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. 
        Blumenthal):
  S. 2763. A bill to provide the victims of Holocaust-era persecution 
and their heirs a fair opportunity to recover works of art confiscated 
or misappropriated by the Nazis; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 2763

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Holocaust Expropriated Art 
     Recovery Act of 2016''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) It is estimated that the Nazis confiscated or otherwise 
     misappropriated as many as 650,000 works of art throughout 
     Europe as part of their genocidal campaign against the Jewish 
     people and other persecuted groups. This has been described 
     as the ``greatest displacement of art in human history''.
       (2) Following World War II, the United States and its 
     allies attempted to return the stolen artworks to their 
     countries of origin. Despite these efforts, many works of art

[[Page S1813]]

     were never reunited with their owners. Some of the art has 
     since been discovered in the United States.
       (3) In 1998, the United States convened a conference with 
     44 nations in Washington, D.C., known as the Washington 
     Conference, which produced Principles on Nazi-Confiscated 
     Art. One of these principles is that ``steps should be taken 
     expeditiously to achieve a just and fair solution'' to claims 
     involving such art that has not been restituted if the owners 
     or their heirs can be identified.
       (4) The same year, Congress enacted the Holocaust Victims 
     Redress Act (Public Law 105-158, 112 Stat. 15), which 
     expressed the sense of Congress that ``all governments should 
     undertake good faith efforts to facilitate the return of 
     private and public property, such as works of art, to the 
     rightful owners in cases where assets were confiscated from 
     the claimant during the period of Nazi rule and there is 
     reasonable proof that the claimant is the rightful owner.''.
       (5) In 2009, the United States participated in a Holocaust 
     Era Assets Conference in Prague, Czech Republic, with 45 
     other nations. At the conclusion of this conference, the 
     participating nations issued the Terezin Declaration, which 
     reaffirmed the 1998 Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-
     Confiscated Art and urged all participants ``to ensure that 
     their legal systems or alternative processes, while taking 
     into account the different legal traditions, facilitate just 
     and fair solutions with regard to Nazi-confiscated and looted 
     art, and to make certain that claims to recover such art are 
     resolved expeditiously and based on the facts and merits of 
     the claims and all the relevant documents submitted by all 
     parties.''. The Declaration also urged participants to 
     ``consider all relevant issues when applying various legal 
     provisions that may impede the restitution of art and 
     cultural property, in order to achieve just and fair 
     solutions, as well as alternative dispute resolution, where 
     appropriate under law.''.
       (6) Numerous victims of Nazi persecution and their heirs 
     have taken legal action to recover Nazi-confiscated art. 
     These lawsuits face significant procedural obstacles partly 
     due to State statutes of limitations, which typically bar 
     claims within some limited number of years from either the 
     date of the loss or the date that the claim should have been 
     discovered. In some cases, this means that the claims expired 
     before World War II even ended. (See, e.g., The Detroit 
     Institute of Arts v. Ullin, No. 06-10333, 2007 WL 1016996 
     (E.D. Mich. Mar. 31, 2007)). The unique and horrific 
     circumstances of World War II and the Holocaust make statutes 
     of limitations and other time-based procedural defenses 
     especially burdensome to the victims and their heirs. Those 
     seeking recovery of Nazi-confiscated art must painstakingly 
     piece together their cases from a fragmentary historical 
     record ravaged by persecution, war, and genocide. This costly 
     process often cannot be done within the time constraints 
     imposed by existing law.
       (7) Federal legislation is needed because the only court 
     that has considered the question held that the Constitution 
     prohibits States from making exceptions to their statutes of 
     limitations to accommodate claims involving the recovery of 
     Nazi-confiscated art. In Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of 
     Art, 592 F.3d 954 (9th Cir. 2009), the United States Court of 
     Appeals for the Ninth Circuit invalidated a California law 
     that extended the State statute of limitations for claims 
     seeking recovery of Holocaust-era artwork. The Court held 
     that the law was an unconstitutional infringement of the 
     Federal Government's exclusive authority over foreign 
     affairs, which includes the resolution of war-related 
     disputes. In light of this precedent, the enactment of a 
     Federal law is the best way to ensure that claims to Nazi-
     confiscated art are adjudicated on their merits.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are the following:
       (1) To ensure that laws governing claims to Nazi-
     confiscated art further United States policy as set forth in 
     the Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art, 
     the Holocaust Victims Redress Act, and the Terezin 
     Declaration.
       (2) To ensure that claims to artwork stolen or 
     misappropriated by the Nazis are not barred by statutes of 
     limitations and other similar legal doctrines but are 
     resolved in a just and fair manner on the merits.

     SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act--
       (1) the term ``actual discovery'' does not include any 
     constructive knowledge imputed by law;
       (2) the term ``artwork or other cultural property'' 
     includes any painting, sculpture, drawing, work of graphic 
     art, print, multiples, book, manuscript, archive, or sacred 
     or ceremonial object;
       (3) the term ``persecution during the Nazi era'' means any 
     persecution by the Nazis or their allies during the period 
     from January 1, 1933, to December 31, 1945, that was based on 
     race, ethnicity, or religion; and
       (4) the term ``unlawfully lost'' includes any theft, 
     seizure, forced sale, sale under duress, or any other loss of 
     an artwork or cultural property that would not have occurred 
     absent persecution during the Nazi era.

     SEC. 5. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     Federal law, any provision of State law, or any defense at 
     law or equity relating to the passage of time (including the 
     doctrine of laches), a civil claim or cause of action against 
     a defendant to recover any artwork or other cultural property 
     unlawfully lost because of persecution during the Nazi era or 
     for damages for the taking or detaining of any artwork or 
     other cultural property unlawfully lost because of 
     persecution during the Nazi era may be commenced not later 
     than 6 years after the actual discovery by the claimant or 
     the agent of the claimant of--
       (1) the identity and location of the artwork or cultural 
     property; and
       (2) information or facts sufficient to indicate that the 
     claimant has a claim for a possessory interest in the artwork 
     or cultural property that was unlawfully lost.
       (b) Possible Misidentification.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a)(1), in a case in which there is a possibility of 
     misidentification of the artwork or cultural property, the 
     identification of the artwork or cultural property shall 
     occur on the date on which there are facts sufficient to 
     determine that the artwork or cultural property is likely to 
     be the artwork or cultural property that was unlawfully lost.
       (c) Applicability.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (a) shall apply to any civil 
     claim or cause of action (including a civil claim or cause of 
     action described in paragraph (2)) that is--
       (A) pending on the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (B) filed during the period beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and ending on December 31, 2026.
       (2) Inclusion of previously dismissed claims.--A civil 
     claim or cause of action described in this paragraph is a 
     civil claim or cause of action--
       (A) that was dismissed before the date of enactment of this 
     Act based on the expiration of a Federal or State statute of 
     limitations or any other defense at law or equity relating to 
     the passage of time (including the doctrine of laches); and
       (B) in which final judgment has not been entered.

                          ____________________