Missouri wins $24B judgment against China in COVID lawsuit

A Landmark Legal Victory for Missouri Against China

In a significant legal development, a federal judge in the United States ruled in favor of the state of Missouri in its $24 billion lawsuit against the Chinese Communist Party and other Chinese entities. The lawsuit alleged that China hoarded critical protective supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic, exacerbating the global health crisis. Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey hailed the decision as a landmark victory, stating, "This is a landmark victory for Missouri and the United States in the fight to hold China accountable for unleashing COVID-19 on the world." The ruling marks a major step in the ongoing efforts to seek accountability from China for its actions during the pandemic.

Judge Stephen Limbaugh of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri ruled that Missouri had provided sufficient evidence to establish the defendants’ liability under Count IV of the complaint. The court ordered the defendants to pay $24,488,825,457.00, plus post-judgment interest. This judgment is six times larger than the previous largest judgment in Missouri’s history, underscoring the gravity of the case. Attorney General Bailey emphasized that China’s failure to appear in court did not absolve it of responsibility, saying, "China refused to show up to court, but that doesn’t mean they get away with causing untold suffering and economic devastation."

The Defendants and the Allegations

The lawsuit named several high-profile defendants, including the People’s Republic of China, the Communist Party of China, the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, the Ministry of Emergency Management, the Ministry of Civil Affairs, the People’s Government of Hubei Province, the People’s Government of Wuhan City, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The allegations centered on China’s actions during the early stages of the pandemic, particularly its alleged hoarding of personal protective equipment (PPE) and other critical medical supplies.

Missouri’s case argued that China’s actions obstructed the production, purchase, and export of essential medical equipment, leading to severe shortages worldwide. This, in turn, caused significant economic harm and exacerbated the suffering of individuals and businesses in Missouri. The lawsuit also initially included claims that China had hidden information about the origins of the virus, but these were later narrowed down to focus solely on the supply hoarding allegations after an appeals court ruling in January.

The Road to Victory in Court

The legal battle began five years ago when former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt first filed the lawsuit against China. Initially, a lower court dismissed the case, but the decision was overturned by a court of appeals in January. The appeals court ruled that the lawsuit could proceed but limited its scope to the issue of supply hoarding. This narrow focus allowed Missouri to build a case that ultimately convinced Judge Limbaugh of China’s liability.

The ruling is a significant achievement for Missouri and could set a precedent for other states or countries seeking to hold China accountable for its actions during the pandemic. Attorney General Bailey made it clear that Missouri intends to pursue the collection of the judgment, even if it means seizing Chinese-owned assets within the state, including farmland. In a bold statement on X (formerly Twitter), Bailey warned China, "Hey China, You owe Missouri $24 BILLION. I just won a judgment in court. Pay up — or we start seizing assets and farmland."

Implications for China and the Global Community

The $24 billion judgment against China sends a strong message about the consequences of its alleged actions during the pandemic. While China has yet to respond to the ruling, the decision is likely to draw international attention and could inspire similar lawsuits from other nations or entities affected by the pandemic. The case also highlights the ongoing tensions between the U.S. and China, particularly regarding issues of transparency and accountability.

For Missouri, the victory represents a significant step toward addressing the economic and human losses incurred during the pandemic. The state suffered greatly, like much of the world, due to shortages of PPE and other essential supplies. The ruling offers a measure of justice and could pave the way for meaningful compensation. However, collecting the judgment may prove challenging, as China is unlikely to willingly comply with the court’s decision. Nevertheless, the precedent set by this case could have far-reaching implications for international law and global accountability in the face of future crises.

The Broader Context of Pandemic Accountability

The ruling comes at a time when the world is still grappling with the aftermath of the pandemic. Five years after the outbreak, many questions remain unanswered, including the origins of the virus and the initial response of global powers like China. The Missouri lawsuit is part of a growing movement to hold accountable those deemed responsible for exacerbating the crisis. While the judgment is a significant legal accomplishment, it also underscores the complexities of pursuing justice on the international stage.

As the global community continues to reflect on the lessons of the pandemic, cases like Missouri’s lawsuit against China remind us of the importance of transparency, cooperation, and accountability in addressing global challenges. The ruling serves as a reminder that even in the face of powerful adversaries, justice can be sought and won. However, the path forward remains uncertain, as the practical enforcement of the judgment and the broader implications for U.S.-China relations will likely shape the narrative in the months and years to come.