[media-credit name=’DEREK MONTGOMERY/Herald photo’ align=’alignnone’ width=’648′][/media-credit]Explaining how lawsuits can be used to cut major funding arteries to terrorist organizations, Chicago Attorney Richard Hoffman presented "Fighting Terrorism in the Courtroom" Wednesday at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

Hoffman, a partner at Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP, took part in Boim v. Quranic Literacy Institute, a case in which financial supporters of the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas were prosecuted for the death of David Boim, a 17-year-old U.S.-Israeli citizen.

"Two armed gunmen, later associated with Hamas, fired on Boim and three friends as they waited for a bus to take them to a college-preparatory class," Hoffman said.

Boim was the only one to be fatally wounded in the incident.

"Proof that Hamas indeed killed Boim, that [the charitable organizations] knew about Hamas, desired the actions carried out by Hamas and engaged in helping were all essential to our case," Hoffman said in his presentation.

The charities in question were the Islamic Association for Palestine, The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Developments and the Quranic Literacy Institute — all U.S.-based charities that drew from unknowing Islamic communities.

All three organizations had ties to known terrorists Musa Mohammad Abu Marzook and Mohammed Salah. The Quranic Literacy Institute provided cover and employment for Salah prior to his attempt to rebuild the Hamas infrastructure in Israel, Hoffman said.

The court ruled the three organizations did indeed contribute funds to Hamas and were subsequently involved in the death of Boim. The jury awarded the Boim family $52 million, which was tripled to $156 million.

After the trial, all three organizations involved in the suit closed their doors.

"You've got to stop the money to stop the killing," Patrick Harrigan, a third-year law student, said. Harrigan added he helped the Anti-Defamation League create amicus curiae for this case in a summer associate law program.

In agreement with Harrigan, Hoffman said terrorist threats can be stymied by cutting off their funding, a significant portion of which comes from the U.S.

"Hamas could not survive without the flow of funds from the U.S.," Hoffman said.

The judgment was established from the Antiterrorism Act of 1990, and was the first time the act was used against international terrorists.

"The lack of precedent made building a case difficult," Hoffman said. "But this decision has caused numerous similar cases to arise around the country. We've blazed the trail."

And such trailblazing made Hoffman an attractive speaker to present to law students, Monique Young, vice president of University of Wisconsin Mock Trial, said.

"We wanted to show that you can affect change without an established path," Young said. "You can see all the new litigation brought about because of this."

David Douglas, president of the Jewish Law Student Association, said Hoffman's speech was an effective means of presenting non-violent methods to battle terrorism.

"We discuss terrorism in meetings," he said. "But we never discussed the legal aspects. It's good that you can fight terrorists in courts instead of with guns."
By fighting terrorism in the courtroom, Young said, lawyers can prevent financiers from supporting terrorist groups.

"This could be a way to stop terrorist cells in the U.S. and stop the money flow," Young said.