Missouri has won an unprecedented $24 billion judgment against China for hoarding critical medical supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic, setting the stage for what could become a global reckoning with the Chinese Communist Party.
Key Takeaways
- A federal judge awarded Missouri a historic $24 billion judgment against China for hoarding protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic – the largest judgment in state history.
- Judge Stephen Limbaugh ruled that China violated both state and federal anti-monopoly laws, causing Missouri to spend $122 million more on PPE and lose over $8 billion in tax revenue.
- The Chinese Communist Party did not appear in court to defend itself, and Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey plans to collect the judgment by seizing Chinese-owned assets, including farmland in the state.
- The lawsuit accused China of suppressing information about the virus as early as September 2019 and deliberately disrupting the global supply chain for protective equipment.
- This landmark ruling could pave the way for other states to pursue similar legal action against China.
A Historic Judgment Against China
Federal Judge Stephen Limbaugh Jr. has ruled in favor of Missouri in its lawsuit against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and various Chinese governmental entities, awarding the state a staggering $24 billion in damages. The judgment represents the largest in Missouri’s history – six times larger than any previous award. The ruling specifically targets the CCP, the People’s Republic of China, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology for their actions at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which allegedly involved hoarding critical medical supplies and disrupting global supply chains.
Judge Limbaugh determined that Missouri provided satisfactory evidence establishing the defendants’ liability under both state and federal anti-monopoly laws. The case, originally filed in 2020 by former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, faced initial dismissal but was later reinstated by a court of appeals. The reinstatement narrowed the focus to accusations of supply hoarding, which ultimately proved successful in securing the landmark judgment.
China’s Alleged Pandemic Misconduct
According to court documents, China engaged in a systematic campaign to monopolize global supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) while simultaneously concealing information about the virus. Judge Limbaugh wrote that “China’s campaign to hoard the global supply of PPE was performed in conjunction with its repeated misrepresentations on the existence, and then scope and human-to-human transmissibility of, the COVID-19 virus.” The judgment further stated that China began suppressing information about COVID-19’s existence and transmissibility as early as September 2019.
The lawsuit specifically accused China of nationalizing American PPE factories and hoarding equipment available for sale in the United States. These actions allegedly caused severe disruptions in the supply chain, forcing Missouri to pay inflated prices for essential medical supplies. Court documents revealed that Missouri spent over $122 million more on PPE than it would have under normal market conditions and lost more than $8 billion in tax revenue due to the economic impact of the pandemic.
Collecting the Judgment
A significant aspect of this case is that China refused to appear in court to defend itself against the allegations. This default has not deterred Missouri officials, who have already announced plans to collect on the judgment. Attorney General Andrew Bailey has boldly declared that Missouri intends to seize Chinese-owned assets, including farmland within the state, to satisfy the judgment. The court tripled the original damages to over $24 billion, citing that the CCP’s actions met the requirements under treble damage statutes.
“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,” stated Bailey. “China refused to show up to court, but that doesn’t mean they get away with causing untold suffering and economic devastation. We intend to collect every penny by seizing Chinese-owned assets, including Missouri farmland.”
Bailey has been particularly outspoken about the verdict, even directly addressing China on social media with the message: “Hey China, You owe Missouri $24 BILLION. I just won a judgment in court. Pay up — or we start seizing assets and farmland.” This aggressive stance signals Missouri’s determination to enforce the judgment despite potential diplomatic complications. Bailey has also suggested that this ruling could inspire similar legal actions from other states seeking compensation for pandemic-related damages.
https://twitter.com/AGAndrewBailey/status/1898127279580233885
Implications for International Relations
The Missouri judgment represents a potentially significant shift in how states might pursue legal remedies against foreign governments for perceived wrongdoing. This finding creates a legal precedent that could encourage other states to pursue similar claims against China or other foreign entities in the future.
While the practical challenges of collecting such a massive judgment from a foreign superpower remain substantial, the symbolic importance of this ruling cannot be understated. It marks the first time a U.S. court has held China legally accountable for aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Attorney General Bailey has framed the judgment as just the beginning of a larger effort to hold China accountable, suggesting that this case may represent the first of many legal challenges to come from various states seeking compensation for pandemic-related losses.
