(JNS) When Kent Yalowitz, a partner at Arnold and Porter, stood before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, April 1 to argue for accountability from the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization, he saw it as the culmination of 21 years and cries for justice from dozens of families of U.S. victims of terror abroad.

In a lengthy and, at times, fiery two-hour session, Yalowitz urged the justices to uphold the constitutionality of the 2019 Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, which expands the 1992 Anti-Terrorism Act to allow Americans harmed by overseas terror attacks to sue foreign entities, including the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization, for damages in U.S. courts.

The case before the Supreme Court aims to deter the authority and the PLO from compensating terrorists and their relatives via “pay-for-slay.”

“Having liability for terror attacks is a way of deterring bad conduct,” Yalowitz told JNS.

The case stems from Palestinian terrorist Khalil Jabarin’s 2018 murder of Ari Fuld, a U.S.-Israeli citizen he fatally stabbed outside a supermarket in Gush Etzion.

Backed by the U.S. Justice Department, Fuld’s family argued that the Palestinian Authority’s and the PLO’s long standing policies of paying terrorists and their families—including Jabarin, who was recently released from prison as a part of Israel’s hostage deal with Hamas—fall under U.S. court jurisdiction under the 2019 Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act.

Hillel Fuld told JNS that Ari Fuld’s case making it to the Supreme Court “in no way makes me feel less devastated about losing my brother. … I think it’s more symbolic than financial. … it sent a message. Iran was being held accountable. The PLO should be, too.

“The PLO is mistakenly regarded as a moderate organization when in reality, the PLO is Hamas in a suit.”