ST. LOUIS — The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled Missouri can move forward with at least one part of its 2020 lawsuit against China for the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Eighth Circuit Court reversed the lower court's dismissal of just one claim in Missouri's suit against The People's Republic of China and others and stated Missouri can move forward with its allegation of China hoarding personal-protective equipment. However, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the lower court's ruling that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act shields China's government from other claims in the suit.
"We will continue to fight for accountability for the horror communist China unleashed on Americans in the form of COVID-19," Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey said in a statement. "We are headed back to court to pursue remedies for all Missourians. I am proud of this win on behalf of the American people."
The lawsuit originally was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri in April of 2020, by former Missouri Attorney General and current Senator Eric Schmitt. The suit alleges the negligence of the People's Republic of China, its National Health Commission, Ministry of Emergency Management, the People's Government of Wuhan City, Wuhan Institute of Virology and others led to the spread of COVID-19. Specifically, Missouri claims the release of the virus from the Wuhan Institute and the defendants' alleged coverup regarding the origins of COVID-19, caused tragic loss of life and financial effects throughout the world.
The complaint also alleges The People's Republic of China and other defendants profited from a "deliberate attempt" to "corner the market as it concealed and downplayed the danger posed by the outbreak." Missouri claims the defendants bought up "high-quality" personal protective equipment (PPE) and then sold low quality PPE to the U.S. and other countries once medical needs skyrocketed and the outbreak spread.
"To sum up, each of the defendants is a 'foreign state' because it is part of China's official government a 'political subdivision' or a governmental 'agency or instrumentality,' Circuit Judge Davis Straus wrote in the Court's ruling. "The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, in other words, shields them from Missouri's lawsuit unless a statutory exception applies."
The Court ruled that Missouri's "hoarding" claim regarding the import and export of medical equipment and PPE used for COVID, is different and identifies as "anticompetitive behavior" and were "actions of a 'private player' in the market."
Chief Judge Lavenski Smith concurred in part and dissented in part stating "I would affirm the district court's dismissal of the hoarding claim. I conclude that China's behavior lacks a direct effect in the United States."
In his dissent, Smith also said "Immunity for foreign states under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, while not impenetrable, is quite stout and stronger than the claim alleged in this case."
The court also noted in its ruling that none of the defendants in Missouri's suit has appeared in court which led to the lower court entering a default and questioning its own subject-matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.