Using his veto power the US President Barack Obama on September 23 vetoed legislation that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia over its alleged ties with the terrorists who carried out the September 11/2001 attacks in the US.
Advertisement
“I am returning herewith without my approval S. 2040, the “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” (JASTA), which would, among other things, remove sovereign immunity in US courts from foreign governments that are not designated state sponsors of terrorism”, Obama notes in the veto message.
The measure carries significant emotional weight; the House sent the bill to Obama just two days ahead of the 15th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.
The measure “would upset longstanding global principles regarding sovereign immunity, putting in place rules that, if applied globally, could have serious implications for US national interests”, the White House said Friday in a three-page veto message to the Senate. Friday, Obama vetoed a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue complicit foreign governments in civil court.
In a letter of notice to the Senate, Obama said that he made the decision because the bill “would be detrimental to USA national interests”.
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton did not publicly comment on the veto, but a spokesperson for her said Clinton would not have vetoed the bill if she were president, according to the Los Angeles Times. The bill would end foreign countries’ immunity in the United States from lawsuits, allowing federal civil suits to go forward if the country is determined to have had a hand in a U.S. terror attack.
Democratic senator Richard Blumenthal said he is confident USA congress will overwhelmingly override Mr Obama’s veto.
The bill’s apparently strong odds of an override point to USA lawmakers’ increasing willingness to pull back on historically close ties with Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest exporter of oil and a prominent global funder of fundamentalist religious doctrine. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who co-wrote the legislation with Sen. The group of families of 9/11 victims, who have been advocating for the bill, though are “outraged and dismayed” over the president’s veto and have “rejected the unconvincing and unsupportable reasons that he offers as explanation”. A vote to override a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority in both the senate and the house of representatives.
The White House argues the legislation would undermine sovereign immunity and potentially expose USA officials and service members to litigation.
Under current USA law, victims may sue a country designated as a state sponsor of terrorism, such as Iran. “If they were culpable in 9/11, they should be held accountable”, said Schumer.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest also previously said, “The whole notion of sovereign immunity is at stake”.
“The Senate will consider it as soon as practicable in this work period”, David Popp, a spokesman for McConnell, said in a statement after the veto.
With no recorded votes on the Bill, it is unclear exactly how many members will back the override. If the Saudis are as entirely innocent as they say they are, Quinn adds, “why be afraid of an exploration of the facts?”
Elsewhere in his remarks, Gravel argued that it makes “political” and “logical” sense not to support Saudi Arabia because of the awful things it has done. Heavy Saudi lobbying, however, has raised question marks in the Senate, and multiple senators are openly suggesting they’ll switch sides next time, citing the “dangerous precedent” the bill sets.
Advertisement
He also said the United States is “caught between a rock and a hard place” as Saudi Arabia controls it through the dollar and Israel controls it through Congress.
