Matthew D.
McGill
(Matt)

International Disputes

Successfully negotiated a $335 million resolution of terrorism claims against the Republic of Sudan arising from the 1998 bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

Successfully resolved NML Capital’s multi-billion dollar claims against the Republic of Argentina after what the Financial Times called “the trial of the century in sovereign debt restructuring.

Obtained $1 billion judgment against the Islamic Republic of Iran for victims of the 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.

Leading U.S. enforcement against the Kingdom of Spain of several arbitral awards redressing violations of the Energy Charter Treaty.

Leading global enforcement of arbitral awards against the Government of India and the Republic of Argentina.

Supreme Court

CC/Devas v. Antrix Corp. (2025) – Arguing this case before the Supreme Court, Matt persuaded the Court to reject a lower court ruling that had found no jurisdiction to hear an enforcement action against one of India’s state-owed entities.  Matt’s 9-0 victory safeguarded the ability of arbitral award holders to bring enforcement actions in the United States against foreign sovereigns and their state-owned entities.  

Opati v. Republic of Sudan (2020) – Matt successfully argued before the Supreme Court on behalf of victims of the 1998 bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and secured a ruling that “unanimously reinstated as much as $4.3 billion in punitive damages awarded against Sudan” (New York Times) setting the stage for the resolution of the Embassy bombing claims and the United States’ delisting of Sudan as a state-sponsor of terrorism.

Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust (2016) – Arguing before the Supreme Court on behalf of creditors that found themselves on the leading edge of Puerto Rico’s debt crisis, Matthew successfully defended an injunction invalidating Puerto Rico’s emergency municipal bankruptcy legislation. The ruling protected bondholders against the “chance that the territory could write its own bankruptcy plan” (Wall Street Journal) and ensured that Congress would retain control over Puerto Rico’s fiscal rescue.

Bank Markazi v. Peterson (2016) – In this important separation-of-powers case, Matthew represented victims of the 1983 Beirut Marine Corps Barracks Bombing who hold judgments against Iran. Ruling in favor of the Beirut Marines, the Supreme Court rejected arguments from Iran’s central bank that Congress had impermissibly invaded the province of the Judicial Branch by authorizing victims of terrorism to seize certain central bank assets. The ruling allowed nearly $2 billion to be distributed to Iran’s victims.

Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd. (2014) – The Supreme Court’s decision in this case confirmed the availability of broad discovery to enforce judgments against foreign sovereigns, empowering creditors to seek information concerning the debtor nation’s assets anywhere in the world.

Sports and Gaming

Led the effort of the Governor of New Jersey to legalize sports wagering in the State, culminating in the Supreme Court’s “historic decision” (Sports Illustrated) in Murphy v. NCAA that struck down the federal law that had prohibited states other than Nevada from legalizing sports betting. By establishing that the federal government has no power to “dictate what a state legislature may and may not do,” this “landmark ruling” (USA Today) safeguards the power of States to govern themselves and cleared the path for States across the country to legalize sports wagering.

Represented the technology provider for the internet-based operations of the New Hampshire Lottery, and secured a judgment that the Wire Act covered only sports betting, and successfully defended that judgment on appeal. The ruling safeguarded “the entire online gambling industry as well as multi-state lotteries such as Powerball” (Am Law Litigation Daily) from an arbitrary change in government policy.