Shurat HaDin

Civil litigation against terrorist organizations, their financial intermediaries, and state sponsors forms the core of Shurat HaDin’s work.[3] The organization combines claims for compensation with efforts to reach assets and challenge financial services allegedly supporting terrorism.[5] Its stated objectives extend to protecting Israel and Jewish communities, combating antisemitism, opposing boycotts, training legal advocates, and responding to what it calls “lawfare” against Israel.[6]

Nitsana Darshan-Leitner is the organization’s founder and president.[3] Shurat HaDin describes itself as based in Tel Aviv, while its contact address is in B.S.R. Tower 3 on Metsada Street in Bnei Brak.[6] Its international work draws on a global network of volunteer lawyers and cooperation with Western intelligence and law-enforcement agencies.[7] Alongside representing terrorism victims, its areas of activity include defending against lawfare suits, opposing academic and economic boycotts, and challenging efforts it regards as attempts to delegitimize Israel.[7]

The organization’s financial strategy emphasizes the dependence of terrorist groups on ordinary commercial infrastructure.[1] Darshan-Leitner summarized that approach by saying: “Terrorist organizations have one foot in the terror world and one foot in the legitimate world. They cannot act without bank accounts.”[1] Its litigation has consequently addressed not only direct perpetrators but also banks, governments, charities, and businesses accused by plaintiffs of facilitating terrorist activity.[5][8]

Shurat HaDin was founded in 2002, following Darshan-Leitner’s involvement in terrorism-victim litigation during the Second Intifada.[2][5] She recalled that, after the intifada began in 2000, she and two lawyer colleagues started handling such cases without payment.[5] The scale and expense of the litigation made continuing as private practitioners impractical; she subsequently established the organization, closed her private practice, and devoted herself to its work.[5]

The Jewish Review of Books describes the name Shurat HaDin as meaning “letter of the law” and identifies the U.S. Southern Poverty Law Center as a model for the organization.[9] The review characterizes Darshan-Leitner as a lawyer specializing in advocacy for terrorism victims and Shurat HaDin as an organization centered on victims’ rights.[9] It describes an approach combining U.S. antiterrorism legislation and Israeli tort law in U.S. courts, including proceedings against terrorist front organizations and Middle Eastern financial institutions with American offices or branches.[9]

By June 2003, Shurat HaDin was also intervening in Israeli public-policy debates: Darshan-Leitner wrote to the prime minister opposing the intended release of 100 Palestinian prisoners and warning that releases could lead to renewed attacks.[10] That intervention expressed the organization’s position and prediction about the proposed policy.[10] A Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs commentary also identifies Darshan-Leitner as a vocal critic of the BDS movement since 2002.[11]

Darshan-Leitner has described contacts with Israeli intelligence as an early element in the development of the organization’s financial-litigation strategy.[5] In an interview, she recalled being approached in March 2002 by members of a Mossad unit she called “Tzalzel,” or Harpoon, which sought ways to combat terrorist financing.[5] She said the unit wanted to understand how civil lawsuits and judgments could disrupt funding, and that cooperation began a month or two after the initial meeting.[5]

The broader Operation Harpoon account concerns efforts by the Mossad, Shin Bet, and other operatives to disrupt terrorist money networks, including flows from Iran, Gulf states, and charitable foundations.[12] A profile connects Darshan-Leitner’s assistance to that operation with help she received in filing terrorism-finance lawsuits.[12] The Jewish Review of Books presents a distinction between institutional separation and informal cooperation: it says that, as an NGO, Shurat HaDin was obliged to remain at arm’s length from Israeli and American government agencies, while recounting Darshan-Leitner’s descriptions of off-the-record exchanges of tactics and information with officials.[9]

One of Shurat HaDin’s major American cases arose from attacks during the Second Intifada and was brought in 2004 on behalf of American families seeking $1 billion.[13] The plaintiffs sought to establish Palestinian Authority involvement in funding and planning seven attacks that killed 33 people between 2001 and 2004.[13] Their evidence included Palestinian Authority files and documents, earlier convictions of Authority members, and allegations of payments and promotions for attackers.[13] The Authority’s attorney, Mark Rochon, argued that it had not known of the attacks and could not be liable for the conduct of individual bombers and gunmen.[13]

After closing arguments on February 19, 2015, a U.S. federal court found the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization liable on February 23 and awarded $218.5 million, subject to tripling under the Anti-Terrorism Act.[13] The resulting award was reported as approximately $655 million.[4] An appeals court subsequently overturned the judgment for insufficient U.S. contacts and lack of jurisdiction; following congressional expansion of jurisdiction in 2019 and a Supreme Court ruling for the plaintiffs in 2025, the appeals court reinstated the judgment in 2026.[4] Collection remained an objective rather than a completed recovery.[4]

Shurat HaDin has also managed substantial litigation in Israeli courts.[14] In 2019, the Jerusalem District Court held the Palestinian Authority, PLO, Yasser Arafat, and Marwan Barghouti liable for damage to victims in 17 civil suits concerning attacks in 1996 and 2000–2002; Hamas was also held liable in some cases.[14] The court identified ideological, financial, and practical grounds for responsibility, but did not find a proven causal link between media incitement and the attacks in those cases.[14] Compensation remained to be determined, although the Authority and PLO were separately ordered to pay 5.545 million shekels in legal fees and costs.[14] Shurat HaDin managed the proceedings with three other attorneys.[14]

Other cases have pursued state sponsors and terrorist organizations directly.[1][3] In 2017, Shurat HaDin obtained a $178.5 million U.S. judgment against Iran and Syria for material support of Hamas in the case brought for Chaya Zissel Braun’s family.[1] Its 2022 annual report describes a U.S. federal judgment ordering Hezbollah to pay $111 million to American citizens wounded by rockets during the 2006 Second Lebanon War, following a finding that Hezbollah violated the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act.[3] The report also describes representation of the families of Eyal Yifrach, Gilad Shaer, and Naftali Fraenkel, kidnapped and murdered in June 2014, in a suit against Hamas seeking NIS 500 million.[3] It records a Jerusalem District Court award of NIS 38 million, approximately $11.8 million, a demand that the Palestinian Authority pay the damages, and an intention to appeal the amount.[3]

Financial institutions have been recurring defendants or targets of legal pressure.[8] Shurat HaDin has sued Bank of China, UBS, LCB, and Arab Bank over alleged involvement in terrorist financing, and pursued cases involving Iran, Syria, Egypt, and North Korea.[8] In 2021, it filed a 1.2-billion-shekel Jerusalem lawsuit on behalf of 24 families comprising 130 plaintiffs against Qatari banks, charities, and other organizations.[15] The complaint alleged transfers to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and included bank-transfer evidence and statements from detained terrorists.[15] Its stated approach was to pressure banks to stop providing services to the organizations named in the complaint.[15]

Shurat HaDin’s own account describes the same June 2021 action differently, as a NIS 1 billion suit against Qatar and several Qatari banks on behalf of 120 plaintiffs.[16] It identifies the family of Daniel Turgeman, a four-and-a-half-year-old killed by a Hamas rocket in 2014, among the plaintiffs.[16] The account alleges logistical support for Hamas attacks but does not report a court outcome.[16] The differences in the reported amount and plaintiff count are not explained by the cited accounts.[15][16]

Shurat HaDin has used letters and threatened proceedings to challenge access to commercial services as well as filing lawsuits.[1][8] In December 2018, it sent an emergency letter to DonorBox concerning the Ramallah-based BDS National Committee’s fundraising account.[1] DonorBox suspended the account within a week and later closed it, citing suspected terrorism links and saying some committee organizations were entities with which it could not do business.[1] In a German banking dispute involving Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East, Shurat HaDin warned that transactions connected with a planned appearance by Rasmea Odeh could expose the bank to civil claims under U.S. antiterrorism law.[17]

Its commercial-pressure work also extended to a planned 2011 Gaza flotilla.[8] Darshan-Leitner said that, working with the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office and the IDF, the organization sent letters to insurance and satellite-communications companies, and she credited those interventions with the flotilla’s cancellation.[8] That explanation of the result was her account of the campaign.[8]

Litigation over boycotts has included a case against Airbnb organized under the U.S. Fair Housing Act for a dozen American Jewish plaintiffs.[18] The dispute followed Airbnb’s announced plan to remove some Israeli settlement listings in the West Bank — known by its original, indigenous Jewish name of Judea and Samaria.[18] An April 2019 settlement allowed listings in the affected region to remain on the platform, while Airbnb stated that it took no position on the plaintiffs’ or others’ claims to legal title.[18] Shurat HaDin also threatened proceedings against the American Studies Association after its December 2013 endorsement of an academic boycott of Israeli universities, arguing that the boycott constituted unlawful discrimination.[19]

Online incitement has been another sustained area of activity.[3] In 2015, Shurat HaDin filed a New York class action against Facebook in the name of 20,000 Israelis, seeking removal of posts alleged to incite the murder of Israelis and prevention of similar new posts rather than monetary damages.[20] The campaign attracted 20,000 participants within three days, and Darshan-Leitner and New York lawyers filed within a week; its demands included blocking users calling for violence against Jews.[21] Facebook rejected the suit as baseless and pointed to its rules against encouragement of violence, direct threats, terrorism, and hate speech.[20]

The organization’s platform litigation encountered repeated legal obstacles.[22][23] By 2017, its social-media cases had either been lost or remained at trial or on appeal, with Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act a major barrier because courts treated platforms as conduits for third-party posts.[22] Shurat HaDin argued that its claims addressed alleged logistical support for terrorist groups rather than merely publication of user content.[22] A case brought for the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, who was killed in the 2015 Paris attacks, was dismissed under Section 230 and eventually reached the Supreme Court.[23] In May 2023, the Court returned the case to the appeals court without deciding the Section 230 question; earlier Facebook suits had also been dismissed.[23]

Shurat HaDin has pursued proceedings connected with international criminal justice and the October 7, 2023 attacks.[8][24] In 2014, Darshan-Leitner said it had prepared complaints against Palestinian leaders and filed complaints concerning Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.[8] She described the objective as deterring Palestinian leaders from joining the International Criminal Court and pursuing Israeli officials there.[8] More recently, the organization filed a Washington federal lawsuit for dozens of October 7 survivors and other victims alleging that Al Jazeera knowingly assisted Hamas through propaganda, recruitment, and incitement.[24] In August 2025, families of three hostages also sued ICC prosecutor Karim Khan in Jerusalem District Court through Darshan-Leitner, alleging delays and improper motives.[25]

Legal assistance for Israelis abroad has developed alongside plaintiff litigation.[4] Following October 7, Shurat HaDin launched a Legal War Room to coordinate action against terrorism and antisemitism; its 2025 report says more than 500 lawyers from 17 countries joined within days and describes cooperation with government agencies and the IDF.[26] A 2026 account describes a legal-assistance command center with more than 600 lawyers in 17 countries available for initial help following an arrest.[4] Its Shachpatz app was designed to give IDF soldiers and reservists traveling abroad guidance on travel, social-media posts, questioning, detention, arrest, and embassy or consulate contacts.[4]

Shurat HaDin’s reported financial results encompass judgments, frozen assets, and collected compensation—distinct measures of its legal work.[5][27] In 2017, its activities were credited with securing more than $200 million for victims’ families and freezing an additional $600 million in assets belonging to terrorist organizations or state sponsors of terrorism.[27] In a 2021 interview, Darshan-Leitner put judgments obtained with the organization’s assistance at $2 billion and actual collections at nearly $300 million.[5] She described collection methods including attaching buildings and funds, pursuing transactions involving states accused of supporting terrorism, and seeking action against banks.[5]

The organization’s achievements page presents broader aggregate claims of representing hundreds of terrorism victims, obtaining billions of dollars in judgments, and securing hundreds of millions in compensation.[28] The distinction between obtaining an award and recovering money remains important in individual cases: the Iran–Syria case produced a reported judgment, while the reinstated Palestinian Authority–PLO award was still awaiting collection in the 2026 account.[1][4] The long appellate history of the latter case also illustrates the importance of jurisdictional legislation and appellate rulings to the organization’s litigation strategy.[4]

Its international reach is reflected both in representation across Israel, North America, and Europe and in its network of volunteer attorneys.[2][7] A U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act report for the six months ending December 31, 2019, lists Berkman Law Office, LLC, as registrant and Shurat HaDin–Israel Law Center as foreign principal.[29] The entry classifies the work as “Legal and Other Services/Lobbying,” describes legal services on the organization’s behalf, and identifies activities devoted to human rights, assistance to terrorism victims and their families, and prevention of terrorism.[29] It reports no finances.[29]

Beyond compensation, Shurat HaDin’s work seeks deterrent effects through litigation costs, threatened liability, asset restrictions, and challenges to commercial access.[1][8] Its campaigns involving financial platforms, banks, social-media companies, and assistance for traveling soldiers show the range of settings in which it applies legal advocacy.[1][4] Those efforts place victims’ civil claims alongside broader campaigns to protect Israel and Jewish communities from terrorism, antisemitism, and boycotts.[6]

The organization’s anti-boycott campaigns have generated disputes over discrimination and political expression.[19] In the American Studies Association dispute, association president Curtis Marez, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Palestine Solidarity Legal Support argued that the academic boycott was protected by the U.S. First Amendment, contrary to Shurat HaDin’s discrimination argument.[19] Some fellow attorneys have also criticized Darshan-Leitner’s tactics; one lawyer pursuing the same cause called her efforts “counterproductive” in connection with cases against major companies including Facebook, Western Union, and Boeing.[27]

A Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs commentary recounts Shurat HaDin’s rejected 2016 Supreme Court petition against the Israel–Turkey reconciliation deal.[30] Darshan-Leitner argued against distinguishing Hamas’s political and military wings, maintaining that accepting such a distinction strengthened its military capabilities; the commentary also records Turkey’s denials that Hamas operated from its territory against Israel.[30]

Allegations in the Al Jazeera, Qatar-related, Facebook, and Karim Khan proceedings should be distinguished from judicial findings.[15][24] Likewise, DonorBox’s stated suspicions and the warning to the German bank did not themselves establish terrorist links or legal liability.[1][17] Changes in social-media policies cannot necessarily be attributed solely to Shurat HaDin, since corporate boycotts and political pressure were also identified as possible influences.[22] Its aggregate financial totals and accounts of intelligence cooperation include organizational claims and Darshan-Leitner’s recollections rather than a case-by-case independently verified accounting.[5][28]