Los Angeles Lawsuits Seek Return of Nazi‑Stolen Art

Heirs of Jewish families are suing in Los Angeles to reclaim artworks seized during the Holocaust, including Lucas Cranach paintings at the Norton Simon Museum and watercolors by Dinah Gottliebova Babbitt. The cases follow new California and federal laws that strengthen claims against U.S. institut…

By Felo News Desk · Published Mon, 21 Sep 2026 03:16:21 GMT

In a fresh wave of litigation over Nazi‑era art theft, heirs of Holocaust victims have filed lawsuits in Los Angeles seeking the return of works that have long been on display in Southern California museums and at Auschwitz. The legal actions come after recent changes to California and federal law that broaden the ability of U.S. residents to pursue claims against institutions holding looted art.

New Laws Fuel Fresh Legal Battles

California’s Assembly Bill 2867, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September 2024, requires state law to apply in lawsuits brought by residents or their heirs for the recovery of artwork taken during the Holocaust or other persecution. The bill follows a federal court decision that allowed the Thyssen‑Bornemisza National Museum in Madrid to retain a Pissarro painting. The legislation is designed to give Jewish families a stronger legal footing when challenging museums that claim they acquired the pieces lawfully.

At the federal level, a 2023 amendment to the 1978 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act clarified that U.S. courts can hear claims involving property taken from U.S. citizens or residents during World War II. The new statutes have prompted a surge in lawsuits against American museums that house art with contested provenance.

Case One: Lucas Cranach the Elder’s “Adam and Eve”

The Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles and its board filed a lawsuit this week in Los Angeles Superior Court against the Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena. The suit renews a dispute over a pair of life‑size oil‑on‑panel paintings by Lucas Cranach the Elder, created in 1530. The Norton Simon Museum has exhibited the works for nearly fifty years and maintains that it holds proper title.

According to the museum, the paintings originally belonged to the Russian noble Stroganov family. In 1931, the Soviet Union sold them at an illicit Berlin auction where art dealer Jacques Goudstikker purchased them. After a complex chain of ownership, a Stroganov descendant eventually sold the pieces to the museum, which restored and preserved them. The museum cites a 2018 federal court ruling that affirmed its legal title and notes that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case in 2019, leaving the lower court decision in place.

Case Two: Dinah Gottliebova Babbitt’s Watercolors

On the same day, the daughters of Dinah Gottliebova Babbitt, a Holocaust survivor and California‑based animator, filed a federal lawsuit in Los Angeles. Babbitt was imprisoned at Auschwitz, where she was forced to paint watercolors of fellow prisoners for Josef Mengele, the infamous Nazi physician. The daughters now seek the return of those works, arguing that the paintings were taken from their mother during her imprisonment.

Neither lawsuit discloses the monetary value of the contested artworks. Representatives for the museums involved have stated that they intend to keep the pieces on public display, asserting that they possess legitimate ownership and a responsibility to preserve the art for educational purposes.

Broader Context of Nazi Art Looting

Between 1933 and 1945, the Nazi regime confiscated more than 600,000 works of art from Jewish families, collectors, and museums across Europe. This remains the largest art theft in history. Eight decades later, many of those pieces still reside in major museums worldwide, sparking ongoing legal and ethical debates over rightful ownership.

The Los Angeles lawsuits are part of a larger movement to recover looted art. While some institutions have returned works or provided compensation, others continue to defend their claims of lawful acquisition. The new California law and federal amendments aim to tip the balance in favor of heirs seeking restitution.

What Happens Next?

Both lawsuits are in early stages, and the courts have yet to issue rulings. The outcomes will set important precedents for future claims involving Nazi‑stolen art in the United States. If the courts side with the heirs, museums may need to negotiate restitution or return of the disputed pieces. If the museums prevail, they will likely continue to display the works, citing their legal title and preservation responsibilities.

The cases underscore the enduring legacy of Holocaust-era art theft and the evolving legal landscape that seeks to address historical injustices. As more heirs come forward, the legal system will be tested on how it balances property rights, historical preservation, and moral restitution.

Key facts

Los Angeles lawsuits target Nazi‑looted art in Southern California museums
New California law strengthens heirs’ claims against U.S. institutions
Lucas Cranach paintings at Norton Simon Museum are a focal point
Dinah Gottliebova Babbitt’s watercolors sought by her daughters
Moscow’s Stroganov family originally owned the Cranach works
Federal court rulings have upheld museum ownership so far

Why it matters

The cases bring renewed attention to the unresolved restitution of Nazi‑stolen art, challenging museums to reconcile legal ownership with moral responsibility for cultural heritage.