The case involved a dispute over assets that had been blocked by the U.S.
government during World War II and seized by the Alien Property Custodian.
Also worth reading: How does enterprise AI impact attorney-client privilege and compliance in legal document drafting and eDiscovery? · What is the definitive architecture for a legal RAG vector database in 2026? · What is the definitive enterprise legal AI infrastructure strategy for law firms and corporate legal departments in 2026?
The Societe Internationale, a Swiss holding company, sought to recover these assets that had been taken from them.
The case established the principle that the government cannot permanently deprive a person of their property without due process of law, even in times of war.
The Court's decision placed limits on the government's ability to confiscate private property during wartime.
The full legal name of the corporation is Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles et Commerciales SA, though it is commonly called "Interhandel."
The American assets seized consisted of bank accounts and over 90% of the capital stock in the General Aniline & Film Corporation of Delaware, valued at the time.
The case has been cited in subsequent cases involving the government's seizure of assets, establishing it as an important precedent in property rights law.
The government had argued that the Societe Internationale was dominated and controlled by officers, agents, and stockholders who were residents or citizens of Germany.
The Supreme Court's ruling required the government to return the seized assets to the Societe Internationale, as their failure to comply was not found to be willful.
The case was significant in limiting the government's wartime powers and protecting the due process rights of private entities.
The decision in Kaufman v.
Societe Internationale has been influential in shaping subsequent jurisprudence on the government's confiscation of private property.