Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey aims to seize Chinese assets across the U.S. to collect a $24.5 billion judgment related to a COVID-19 lawsuit. China’s government rejects the ruling, asserting U.S. courts lack jurisdiction. Experts express doubt regarding the feasibility of collection and potential complications in international relations.

Missouri’s attorney general, Andrew Bailey, has announced intentions to seize Chinese assets across the United States to secure a $24.5 billion judgment awarded in a lawsuit stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. The lawsuit alleges that China hoarded personal protective equipment, which had detrimental impacts on the state and its residents. Despite this, experts express skepticism about Missouri’s ability to collect on the judgment, with one stating that the prospects of actual compensation are “very slim.”

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has rejected the U.S. federal judge’s ruling in Missouri, calling the lawsuit “absurd” and asserting that the U.S. lacks jurisdiction over its actions during the pandemic. The ministry labeled the legal actions taken by Missouri as “malicious abuse of lawsuits” intended to defame China. Bailey described the ruling from U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh as a significant victory in holding China accountable.

The lawsuit originated with Bailey’s predecessor, Eric Schmitt, who emphasized China’s responsibility. Notably, Chinese interests reportedly own approximately 44,000 acres of farmland in Missouri, representing a small fraction of the state’s total land area. While Bailey intends to work with the federal government to identify these assets, there is uncertainty regarding the ownership claims against the Chinese government itself.

Experts caution that unilateral state actions, such as those proposed by Bailey, could complicate international relations, and that any enforcement of judgments against foreign nations is typically managed at the federal level. Furthermore, practical challenges exist concerning asset seizure and potential retaliatory measures from China, including sanctions against Missouri businesses operating in China.

The legal journey began when Limbaugh initially dismissed the case, citing the protections for foreign nations from lawsuits in U.S. courts. Following an appeal, a portion of the lawsuit was allowed to progress, prompting Limbaugh to accept Missouri’s damage estimates and issue the judgment. Moving forward, Bailey has expressed determination to pursue asset seizures as a means of ensuring the collection of the awarded judgment.

In summary, while Missouri’s attorney general seeks to collect a significant judgment against China regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, the actual prospects for success appear slim. China has rejected the U.S. court’s jurisdiction, and potential complications arise from international relations and the specifics of asset ownership. The case highlights the complexities of state-level legal actions against foreign entities, often requiring federal intervention for effective enforcement and resolution.

Original Source: www.independent.co.uk

Related posts:

Missouri Secures $24 Billion Judgment Against China in COVID Hoarding Case Missouri Court Orders China to Pay $24 Billion for PPE Hoarding During Covid U.S. Charges Twelve Chinese Nationals for Targeting Dissidents Through Hacking China’s Strategic Response to Trump’s Renewed Tariffs: Lessons from the Past