promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.” Pub.L. No. 105-338 § 3, 112 Stat. 3178. The United Nations also treated the Hussein Regime as the effective Iraqi government. See UN SCOR Res. 661 & 986 (referring to the Hussein Regime as the “Government of Iraq.”) Thus, the Court confronts no controversy — political or otherwise — regarding which government controlled Iraq during the Programme. Second, analyzing whether or not a former government’s conduct can be attributed to its sovereign is a legal question. It turns on the manageable principles discussed below, and is necessarily decided in some form in any case applying the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”) or the act of state doctrine, and many that do not. See, e.g., Konowaloff, 702 F.3d at 147 (<HOLDING>); Marcos, 806 F.2d at 358-59 (discussing acts
recognizing governments seizure of painting as act of state holding that an initially reasonable seizure can become an unreasonable seizure that violates the fourth amendment when officers refuse to return seized property holding the use of deadly force standing alone does not constitute a seizure and absent an actual physical restraint or physical seizure the alleged unreasonableness of the officers conduct cannot serve as a basis for a  1983 cause of action holding seizure of evidence in plain view reasonable under fourth amendment holding seizure unreasonable due to length of detention of property