Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Thursday September 29 2016, @01:17PM   Printer-friendly
from the first-time-for-everything dept.

For the first time since President Obama took office in 2009, Congress has overridden his veto.

The U.S. Senate voted 97-1 to override President Obama's veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, which would allow victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to sue Saudi Arabia. The lone dissenting vote was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), who has "always had the president's back":

In a letter Monday to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.) and ranking member Adam Smith (D-Wash.), Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter warned that allowing the bill to become law risked "damaging our close and effective cooperation with other countries" and "could ultimately have a chilling effect on our own counter-terrorism efforts." Thornberry and Smith both circulated letters among members in the last few days, urging them to vote against overriding the veto. CIA Director John O. Brennan also warned of the 9/11 bill's "grave implications for the national security of the United States" in a statement Wednesday.

The House of Representatives voted 348-to-77:

Congress on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly to override a veto by President Obama for the first time, passing into law a bill that would allow the families of those killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for any role in the plot.

Democrats in large numbers joined with Republicans to deliver a remarkable rebuke to the president. The 97-to-1 vote in the Senate and the 348-to-77 vote in the House displayed the enduring power of the Sept. 11 families in Washington and the diminishing influence here of the Saudi government.

See also: The Risks of Suing the Saudis for 9/11 by the New York Times Editorial Board and this article in the Saudi Gazette.

Previously: President Obama to Veto Bill Allowing September 11 Victims to Sue Saudi Arabia


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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 30 2016, @12:01AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 30 2016, @12:01AM (#408174)

    What's the process for suing the Saudi government from America anyway?

    Has the US government suddenly taken over the whole world and we're all subject to US law now?

    I'm thinking this is more just some bullshit token legislation and that Saudi Arabia doesn't give a shit about what victims of 9/11 do in US courts, and that there's absolutely fuck all the US can do to force Saudi Arabia to comply with any court decisions. If they try, Saudi Arabia will spend all their US treasuries on Russian missiles, close the oil taps, and stock up on popcorn for the economic collapse triggered in the US.

  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Friday September 30 2016, @02:23AM

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Friday September 30 2016, @02:23AM (#408208) Homepage Journal

    What's the process for suing the Saudi government from America anyway?

    Presumably, one would file a lawsuit in Federal court.

    Has the US government suddenly taken over the whole world and we're all subject to US law now?

    No. Not even close. If (and that's a big if) a plaintiff were to prevail in Federal court and damages were awarded, presumably the Saudis would claim that this is ridiculous (and it is), and that they weren't going to pay. The next step would be for the plaintiff(s) to petition the court to seize Saudi assets in the US. Apparently, the Saudis currently have ~USD$100 Billion in assets that are physically in the US. The court could so order, and assign someone to oversee the sale of said assets to pay the damages awarded.

    And that's is where things get really stupid. If we (the US government) actually seize Saudi assets (assuming they don't liquidate them and move them offshore before any lawsuit concludes), we would put US assets (and we have those all over the world) at risk to any country that decides we wronged some of their citizens.

    What's more, if your country held assets in the US (say a Sovereign wealth fund or other governmental investments), wouldn't you be really leery of keeping them in the US, should the US now decide that *your* country can now be sued by American citizens?

    This is really stupid and President Obama was right to veto the bill.

    Congress overrode the veto as a symbolic gesture to "show" voters (since it's only a little more than a month until the election) that they are "looking out for the American People." It's a cynical political ploy by the members of Congress to improve their standing with their constituents.. If this weren't an election year, the veto would never have been overridden, as the Democrats would have supported the president and 2/3 majorities are required in both houses.

    Frankly, it's disgusting. Another Soylentil has a sig that goes something like "Write your Congressman. Tell him he sucks!" Now is a good time for that, IMHO.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr