If Congress were to go through with the override, it would be the first such instance in Obama’s two terms as president. I know you described it as the ‘Saudi Arabia Bill.’ They certainly are interested in the outcome. “My Administration therefore remains resolute in its commitment to assist these families in their pursuit of justice and do whatever we can to prevent another attack in the United States”, the president wrote in his veto message to Congress.
Advertisement
Obama long had objected, too, warning that if US citizens are allowed to take the Saudis into court, then foreign countries could do the same to the United States, its diplomats and its service members.
“I have deep sympathy for the families of the victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, who have suffered grievously”, Obama wrote in his veto message to Congress, according to The New York Times. It has raised the specter of the US government being sued in courts all over the world, and pointed to Saudi Arabia’s threat to sell off hundreds of billions of dollars in USA debt and other assets, though the effectiveness of that has been called into question.
The White House insists Obama did not veto because of Saudi Arabia, saying it is anxious the bill would set a risky legal precedent, undermining the principle of sovereign immunity. The measure cleared the Senate in May, also by voice vote. The White House worries that the nation’s diplomats and even business leaders could be put at risk by such legislation.
Even before the president announced his veto, White House officials held a series of urgent meetings on Capitol Hill, trying to persuade senators and members of Congress to allow the president’s decision to stand.
Mindy Kleinberg, who lost her husband on 9/11 and protested earlier this week in Washington D.C.in effort to get Obama to sign the bill, told NBC News, “I’m greatly disappointed”.
Many politicians could be having second thoughts about bucking the president after defence secretary Ash Carter gave weight to concerns the Bill could backfire on service members.
“If elected president, I would sign such legislation should it reach my desk”.
New York Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, issued a statement within moments of receiving the veto promising that it would be “swiftly and soundly overturned”. The White House has promised to lobby against it. The allegations were never substantiated by later USA investigations.
The kingdom may have additional holdings not included in the data on deposit with the New York Federal Reserve Bank, in entities in third countries, or through positions in derivatives. Proponents, however, call it “narrowly” crafted to guard against such things.
He said a decision by Obama to deny the 9/11 families “their well-deserved day in court would truly stain his legacy”. “No matter how much the Saudi lobbying and propaganda machine may argue otherwise, JASTA is a narrowly drawn statute that restores longstanding legal principles that have enjoyed bipartisan support for decades”.
Administration officials had been eying a Friday afternoon veto, which would have come after Congress was expected to adjourn until November’s election contests.
It’s unclear how soon an override vote might come.
“The bill is not balanced, sets a risky precedent, and has real potential to destabilize vital bilateral relationships and the global economy”, GE Chief Executive Jeffrey Immelt said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who supports the bill. But the Wisconsin Republican also voiced his own doubts about the legislation, saying the implications for lawsuits against Americans anxious him. “At the same time, these victims need to have their day in court”.
Advertisement
“JASTA’s a fait accompli if it happens over the next week”, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., who has voiced concerns about the legislation, said Tuesday using the acronym for the bill. The argument that this legislation would increase the liability of the United States fails the test of fact and law.
