Missouri’s Legal Battle Against China: A Symbolic Gesture with Global Implications
In an unprecedented move, Missouri’s Attorney General, Andrew Bailey, has vowed to seize Chinese-owned assets across the United States to recover a $24.5 billion judgment awarded in a lawsuit related to China’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. This legal gambit, while attention-grabbing, faces significant hurdles, both legally and diplomatically, casting doubt on its feasibility.
The Case Against China
At the heart of the dispute is a lawsuit alleging that China hoarded personal protective equipment (PPE) early in the pandemic, exacerbating shortages in Missouri. Despite China’s dismissal of the suit as "absurd" and its refusal to acknowledge U.S. jurisdiction, a federal judge ruled in Missouri’s favor, tripling the estimated damages to $24.5 billion. AG Bailey has declared intent to seize Chinese assets, including farmland, anywhere in the U.S., though the practicality of this plan is questionable.
The Reality of Sovereign Immunity
International law typically shields foreign governments from lawsuits, a principle known as sovereign immunity. Experts like Paul Nolette and Duncan Levin express skepticism, noting that such disputes are usually resolved through diplomatic channels or by international organizations, not individual states. China’s stance that U.S. courts lack jurisdiction over it underscores the legal challenges Missouri faces.
The Farmland Factor
While Missouri’s farmland owned by Chinese interests is minimal—about 44,000 acres—it represents a symbolic target. However, identifying and seizing such assets, particularly distinguishing state-owned from private entities, poses logistical challenges. Legal experts question whether Missouri has the authority to enforce this action beyond its borders.
Potential Backlash and Diplomatic Fallout
The move could strain U.S.-China relations, with China threatening countermeasures, such as sanctions against Missouri businesses operating in China. This highlights the broader implications of what many view as a symbolic political move rather than a viable legal strategy.
A History of Legal Hurdles
The lawsuit, initiated by former AG Eric Schmitt, initially faced dismissal but was revived on appeal, focusing narrowly on PPE hoarding claims. The recent ruling, while a victory for Missouri, rests on shaky legal ground, with enforcement appearing more theoretical than realistic.
Conclusion: A Bold but Unlikely Strategy
Missouri’s action, while garnering attention, seems more a political statement than a practical legal maneuver. The skepticism of experts and the potential for diplomatic retaliation suggest that this case is unlikely to result in the seizure of assets or financial compensation. It underscores the complexities of international legal disputes and the limitations of state-level actions on the global stage.
