Attorney General Formella, Bipartisan Coalition Support 9/11 Victims’ Efforts to Recover Frozen Taliban Funds

Concord, NH - Attorney General John M. Formella announces that the New Hampshire Department of Justice has joined a bipartisan coalition of 31 state attorneys general in filing a friend-of-the-court brief with the United States Supreme Court supporting victims and families of victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks who are seeking to enforce billions of dollars in judgments against frozen Taliban-controlled funds.

"More than two decades after September 11, families who endured unimaginable loss should not have to continue fighting simply to enforce judgments they have already obtained in federal court," said Attorney General Formella. "Congress established a clear legal framework to ensure that victims of terrorism can pursue the assets of those responsible. We are joining this brief because we believe that framework should be applied as Congress intended and that these victims and their families deserve the opportunity to enforce the judgments they have fought for years to obtain."

The states represented in the coalition have citizens who were among the nearly 3,000 people murdered on September 11, 2001, as well as Americans who have been killed or injured in other acts of terrorism attributed to the Taliban. Some of those victims, and the estates of others, have obtained roughly $17 billion in final judgments against the Taliban in federal courts, many following years of litigation.

At issue before the Supreme Court is approximately $3.5 billion in Taliban-controlled funds held by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for Da Afghanistan Bank, Afghanistan's central bank. The victims seek to use those frozen funds to satisfy the judgments they have already obtained.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the funds could not be reached under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. The coalition argues that decision misreads the federal law Congress enacted to ensure that victims of terrorism can enforce judgments against the assets of terrorist parties.

In the brief, the states argue that Congress established a straightforward rule: when a person has obtained a judgment against a terrorist party for an act of terrorism, assets of that terrorist party that are located in the United States, including blocked assets, may be used to satisfy the judgment. The coalition argues that rule applies here regardless of when the Taliban assumed control of Afghanistan and its central bank.

The case before the Supreme Court is Fiona Havlish, et al. v. The Taliban, et al., No. 26-292. The petition for review was filed August 31, 2026.

Also joining the brief are the attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

10.02- Havlish v. Taliban Amicus .pdf