Overriding Obama’s veto so victims can sue Saudi Arabia

Overriding Obama’s veto so victims can sue Saudi Arabia September 29, 2016

Congress passed a bill allowing 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia for enabling some of its citizens to carry out the attacks.  But President Obama vetoed the measure, saying that it would violate the principle that sovereign nations are immune from foreign lawsuits by private citizens and will open the United States to similar suits.

Yesterday, in a rare show of bipartisan unity, Congress overrode the veto.  That requires 2/3 of the vote, but this override was 97-1 in the Senate and 348 to 77 in the Senate, as Democrats voted against their own president.

That’s satisfying emotionally, but is it wise for Congress to interfere in foreign relations, traditionally the domain of the Executive Branch?  And is it wise to throw out sovereign immunity?  Won’t this jeopardize American military, intelligence, and diplomatic operatives, as well as claims from foreign citizens who don’t like us against the nation as a whole?  Or is it worth the risk to get back at Saudi Arabia?

From Paul McLeary, Overruled: Congress Soundly Rejects Obama’s Veto of 9/11 Bill | Foreign Policy:

After a series of impassioned floor speeches Wednesday morning, both the U.S. Senate and House acted with sweeping bipartisan comity, rejecting the president’s opposition to a bill that allows the families of American victims of the 9/11 attacks to sue the government of Saudi Arabia. . . .

The Senate voted 97-1, and the House, 348 to 77.

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) joined Graham in a failed effort to tweak the legislation and make it harder not only for families to pursue lawsuits, but also for the U.S. to be sued by foreigners in the future. The European Union also signaled its opposition to the bill last week in a demarche to the State Department.

But in the end, despite proclaimed widespread Democratic opposition, only Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada sided with the White House by casting the lone vote against override in the upper chamber

CIA Director John Brennan said in a statement that the bill will have “grave implications” for national security, particularly at the spy agency.

The fight put up by the White House, Pentagon, and intelligence agencies centers around the principle of sovereign immunity, which protects American officials from lawsuits. “If we fail to uphold this standard for other countries,” Brennan said, “we place our own nation’s officials in danger.No country has more to lose from undermining that principle than the United States — and few institutions would be at greater risk than CIA.”

[Keep reading. . .] 

"Of course. The program's guests have been right about some things and wrong about others. ..."

Sasse’s “This Is My Body”
"ChatBot Luther clearly hasn't spent any time consuming the actual Luther's writings as he's got ..."

Sasse’s “This Is My Body”
"This may surprise some here, but I love the idea of the sacrament of communion ..."

Sasse’s “This Is My Body”
"I believe many on this blog will disagree with me, but I am not a ..."

Sasse’s “This Is My Body”

Browse Our Archives