Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday September 13 2016, @09:19AM   Printer-friendly
from the otherwise-we-could-be-both-goose-AND-gander dept.

President Obama plans to veto a bipartisan bill that would create an exception to the sovereign immunity doctrine, allowing victims of state-sponsored terrorism to sue foreign governments:

President Barack Obama will veto a bill that would allow terror victims of the attacks on September 11, 2001, to sue Saudi Arabia, the White House said Monday. "That's still the plan," White House press secretary Josh Earnest said when asked if the President planned to veto the bill. The White House had previously suggested Obama would not sign the bill when it first passed the Senate in May saying it would complicate diplomatic relations. [...] Lawmakers are expected to attempt to override the veto, and if successful, would mark the first time in Obama's presidency.

The bill passed in the House and Senate unanimously.

Also at The New York Times , Reuters.

S.2040 - Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act

Previously: Saudi Arabia Threatens to Sell $750 Billion in US Assets If 9/11 Bill Passes


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by zocalo on Tuesday September 13 2016, @11:18AM

    by zocalo (302) on Tuesday September 13 2016, @11:18AM (#401248)

    If US were to open the door to individuals suing governments, it might just be the US government that would be sued, by the millions of people whose lives it destroyed in misdirected vengeance.

    They do specifically state it's for state sponsored terrorism, so all those perfectly legal wars the US has waged directly are presumably exempt. Of course, since one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist, that wouldn't necessarily get them off the hook for all the various bits of aid and support they've provided to para-militaries across the Middle-East, Africa, Central/Eastern Europe, Central/South America, the Far East... it just depends on how far back you are prepared (and allowed) to go. Pretty sure there will be plenty of human rights lawyers just lining up to give it a try if the opportunity arises though.

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Bobs on Tuesday September 13 2016, @12:49PM

    by Bobs (1462) on Tuesday September 13 2016, @12:49PM (#401265)

    They do specifically state it's for state sponsored terrorism, so all those perfectly legal wars the US has waged directly are presumably exempt.

    Likely you were being sarcastic, but the US would be opening itself up to a huuge collection of legal problems as the US Congress hasn't declared [wikipedia.org] many wars:

    Then imagine when multiple entities pull a a Peter Thiel, and bankrolls [theguardian.com] hundreds / thousands of lawsuits by various parties against the US.

    Some who might spend millions+ to subsidize and cataylze lawsuits against the US: China, Iran, Russia, Saudi's. And wealthy individuals with an axe to grind. And lawyers sniffing a big settlement.

      All these lawsuits will be a huge boon for USA's enemies:

    • Weaken legal standing as various entities rule against US. If US ignores then weakens international legal systems that we use to reign in bad actors.
    • US wastes a lot of time / energy defending agaisnt / justifying a lot of force.
    • US forced to air a lot of dirty laundry as it is rehashed in court / social media.
    • Even if US wins cases in court, get damaged in public/international opinion. This is a tool that we prefer to use to reign in others.

    And this will be an infinite investigations and suits: Think of the never-ending series of investigations and press for Hillary Clinton over 1 small engagement in Bengahzi, and 1 email server. Imagine the literally endless suits, investigations, reviews, judgements, etc as the USA, CIA, NSA, DOD, BlackWater, etc's actions are reviewed by millions of lawyers, driven by greed, hunger for justice, and the funds of American's enemies.

    What is the upside again? Hasn't the US government compensated people harmed by the 9/11 attacks? I generally despise the Saudi government and think they should have been held accountable for their contributions. But this will hurt the US and weaken international law more than it will help anyone.
     

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @01:51AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @01:51AM (#401574)

      "rein in" not "reign in"