The Jerusalem District Court quietly delivered one of the most consequential legal blows yet against Hamas this week, ordering the terrorist organization to pay nearly one billion shekels in damages to victims of the October 7 massacre. The ruling, issued by Judge Eran Shila, did not involve dramatic testimony or lengthy deliberations. Hamas simply failed to respond, and the court entered a default judgment that places the organization squarely and formally on record as financially liable for one of the worst terror attacks in Israel’s history.
The case was brought by hundreds of plaintiffs, including survivors of the attack and family members of those murdered, most of them residents of kibbutzim and communities near the Gaza border. Attorney David Simana filed the claims under Israel’s Terror Victims Compensation Law, which came into force in 2024 and allows Israeli courts to impose punitive damages on terrorist organizations and those responsible for their actions. Under the law, heirs of terror victims are eligible for ten million shekels per person, while survivors left with permanent disabilities may receive five million shekels each. The ruling applies solely to Hamas; a parallel case against the Palestinian Authority continues despite its having submitted a defense.
Simana welcomed the decision, saying, “I welcome the court’s decision, which gives justice to the victims and their families.” He acknowledged the obvious difficulty of collecting damages from a terrorist organization but emphasized that the judgment is a critical step in a broader legal campaign. Referring to the ongoing proceedings against the Palestinian Authority, he added that more than five billion shekels have already been seized for the benefit of roughly two thousand clients, and expressed hope that the court would ultimately recognize the Authority’s responsibility for the events of October 7.
The court ruling raises a larger question that extends beyond this single case: what does justice look like when the perpetrators of mass murder operate as terror organizations and are backed by states, institutions, and financial networks spread across the globe?
The Bible addresses this question with stark clarity. “He who sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6). The verse does not speak in metaphors or abstractions. Human blood demands an accounting in the human legal sphere. The Sages explain that this principle establishes courts as a divine mandate, not merely a social convenience. Justice is not optional, and accountability is not symbolic. Even when punishment cannot be fully enforced, the obligation to name guilt and assign responsibility remains absolute.
That principle is now playing out far beyond Jerusalem. In the wake of October 7, victims and their families have launched a sweeping series of lawsuits in the United States against Hamas, other designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations, and a wide range of alleged state sponsors and enablers. These cases, filed primarily in U.S. federal courts, rely on statutes such as the Anti-Terrorism Act and the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which allows victims to sue foreign states designated as sponsors of terrorism for acts including extrajudicial killing, hostage-taking, and material support for terror.
Iran, Syria, and North Korea are central targets of this litigation, accused of financing, training, and equipping Hamas. In September, a prominent Jewish advocacy group filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, on behalf of more than 140 plaintiffs, seeking at least seven billion dollars in damages. ADL CEO Jonathan A. Greenblatt said the goal was “holding those responsible for the carnage accountable, from the state sponsors who provided the funding, weapons, and training to the terrorist organizations who carried out these unspeakable atrocities.” Among the plaintiffs were David and Hazel Brief, whose son Yona, an Israeli soldier, died of wounds sustained during the attack. “We believe it is critical that those responsible for the horrific terror inflicted that day are held accountable in a court of law,” they said.
Other lawsuits push even further, targeting financial and institutional infrastructure accused of enabling Hamas. Victims have sued the cryptocurrency exchange Binance and its founder, alleging the platform facilitated more than a billion dollars in transactions linked to terrorist organizations. A Palestinian-American real estate developer has been accused of allowing Hamas to use his properties and infrastructure in Gaza for military purposes. UNRWA faces a lawsuit seeking more than one billion dollars, with plaintiffs alleging that the agency knowingly allowed terror tunnels under its facilities and relied on money changers tied to Hamas. Additional cases name U.S.-based student groups accused of serving as Hamas propaganda arms, as well as Meta and the Associated Press for alleged roles in enabling or disseminating Hamas-linked content and imagery on October 7.
None of these cases is simple, and many defendants may never voluntarily pay a cent. But the cumulative effect is unmistakable. Courts in Israel and the United States are constructing a detailed legal record that assigns responsibility, names accomplices, and strips away the false neutrality that has long shielded terror organizations and their supporters.
The Jerusalem ruling makes one fact unavoidable. October 7 is no longer only a battlefield event or a political argument. It is now a matter of judicial record, with damages calculated, liability assigned, and blame fixed squarely on Hamas. In the Bible’s legal vision, justice begins not with vengeance but with truth stated plainly and publicly. This week, an Israeli court did exactly that, and the legal aftershocks are only beginning.
