Obama’s veto sets up a fight in Congress next week – and what could be the first congressional override of an Obama veto. The bill was earlier passed in the House and Senate without any dissents, but since then several lawmakers have expressed misgivings with the measure echoing same concerns voiced by the White House.
Advertisement
In his veto message to Congress, Obama said the legislation “undermines core us interests”, upending the normal means by which the government singles out foreign nations as state sponsors of terrorism and opening USA officials and military personnel to legal jeopardy.
It was unclear whether the White House had peeled off enough votes to avert a veto override, which would be a major defeat for the president.
NEWS BRIEF President Obama has vetoed a lawsuit that would have opened the door for the families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia.
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Obama “is much more anxious about the long-term impact of this legislation on our national security than he is about the impact that this could have in his daily interactions with members of Congress”.
The Senate will move to a potential override vote “as soon as practicable”, said a spokesman for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
President Obama, in his veto message, said the bill would undermine the USA government’s ability to act against countries sponsoring terrorism. “The president’s not blind to the politics of the situation”, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Friday.
“It’s disappointing the president chose to veto legislation unanimously passed by Congress and overwhelmingly supported by the American people”, John Cornyn of Texas, the Republican whip and a co-sponsor, said in a statement.
“If the Saudis did nothing wrong, they should not fear this legislation”, Schumer said in a statement. A campaign aide said on Friday that Clinton would sign the legislation if she was in the Oval Office, according to Yahoo News.
Terry Strada, whose husband Tom was killed in World Trade Center Tower One, told AFP the 9/11 “families are outraged and very disappointed” by Obama’s decision.
“We also make a strong case that the most effective way for the United States to confront state sponsors of terrorism is to level a government-wide designation against them and take appropriate steps, including sanctions, to isolate them from the United States and the rest of the global community, that that is a forceful way to compel them to stop supporting terrorism”, he said.
“There are always diplomatic considerations that get in the way of justice, but if a court proves the Saudis were complicit in 9/11, they should be held accountable”, Sen.
Demonstrating the hard political position the White House is in, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, Obama’s former secretary of state, expressed her support for the legislation Friday.
House Speaker Paul Ryan followed suit Wednesday, saying “I do think the votes are there for the override”. “For these reasons, I must veto the bill“. “The families of the victims of 9/11 deserve their day in court”, Schumer added. And I do worry about the precedents. One of these tools is designating the foreign government in question as a state sponsor of terrorism, which carries with it a litany of repercussions, including the foreign government being stripped of its sovereign immunity before USA courts in certain terrorism-related cases and subjected to a range of sanctions.
Advertisement
Earnest argued the Obama administration is concerned about the impact on US relations with countries around the world, not just with Saudi Arabia.
