Vote reverses veto on suing Saudi Arabia

Bill lets kin of 9/11 victims cite aid to attackers in court

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., heads to the Senate floor Wednesday for the override vote. Corker, who led a bipartisan group of senators with concerns about the legislation, complained of “zero desire” from the White House to fight the vote.
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., heads to the Senate floor Wednesday for the override vote. Corker, who led a bipartisan group of senators with concerns about the legislation, complained of “zero desire” from the White House to fight the vote.

WASHINGTON -- Democrats joined with Republicans on Wednesday to hand Barack Obama the first veto override of his presidency, voting overwhelmingly to allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia in U.S. courts for alleged Saudi support of the attackers.


RELATED ARTICLES

http://www.arkansas…">State's six in Congress back override http://www.arkansas…">Stopgap spending gets Congress' OK

photo

AP

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid cast the lone vote Wednesday in the Senate to sustain President Barack Obama’s veto of a measure to allow families of Sept. 11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia in U.S. courts.

The House and Senate voted to reverse Obama's decision to scuttle the legislation that allowed such suits. Democrats in large numbers in both chambers supported the override despite warnings from Obama and top national security officials that flaws in the bill could put U.S. interests, troops and intelligence personnel at risk.

The Senate vote was 97-1, with only Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., supporting the president. The House vote a few hours later was 348-77, with 123 Democrats voting to override. Obama said during a CNN interview that overriding his veto was a mistake that may set a "dangerous precedent."

Arkansas' congressional delegation supported the veto override.

Lawmakers said their priority wasn't Saudi Arabia, a longtime ally of the U.S. in the Middle East, but the 9/11 victims and their families who continue to demand justice 15 years after attackers flew hijacked commercial airliners into two World Trade Center towers in New York and into the Pentagon in Virginia. A hijacked plane also crashed in a field in Pennsylvania. Nearly 3,000 people were killed. Fifteen of the 19 Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers were Saudis.

"Overriding a presidential veto is something we don't take lightly, but it was important in this case that the families of the victims of 9/11 be allowed to pursue justice, even if that pursuit causes some diplomatic discomforts," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a chief sponsor of the bill.

Speaking at a forum in Washington, CIA Director John Brennan said he was concerned about how Saudi Arabia would interpret the bill.

He said the Saudis provide significant amounts of information to the U.S. to help foil extremist plots.

"It would be an absolute shame if this legislation, in any way, influenced the Saudi willingness to continue to be among our best counterterrorism partners," Brennan said.

On CNN, Obama said a few lawmakers who backed the bill weren't aware of its potential impact. He didn't name them. "And, frankly, I wish Congress here had done what's hard," he said. "My job as commander in chief is to make sure we are looking ahead at how this will impact our overall mission.

"It was, you know, basically a political vote," he added.

But Republicans and Democrats said the White House had been slow to respond to the bill and miscalculated lawmakers' intent to act on the legislation along with the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.

When Obama and senior national security officials such as Defense Secretary Ashton Carter finally weighed in, it was too late.

The earliest version of the bill was introduced in 2009, but it gathered momentum this spring. The Senate passed the bill by voice vote in May. The bill then stalled in the Republican-controlled House until August, when 9/11 families exerted pressure on Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., while he was on a campaign swing in New York.

On Sept. 9, two days before the 15th anniversary of 9/11, the House passed the bill by voice vote with little debate.

On Tuesday, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said lawmakers did not delve into the details as much as they could have when considering its passage.

"I wish we had all focused on this a little bit more, earlier, but I think the same difficulties would have presented themselves," he said.

Traveling Wednesday aboard Air Force One, White House spokesman Josh Earnest called the vote "embarrassing" given the cursory review.

"Ultimately, these senators are going to have to answer their own conscience and their constituents as they account for their actions today," Earnest said.

Sovereign immunity

Despite reversing Obama's decision, a bipartisan group of 28 senators led by Corker suggested that defects in the bill could open a legal Pandora's box, triggering lawsuits from people in other countries seeking redress for injuries or deaths caused by military actions in which the U.S. may have had a role.

"I have tremendous concerns about the sovereign immunity procedures that would be set in place by the countries as a result of this vote," he said before casting his own vote to override the veto.

Corker chided the White House for being angry over the outcome when the administration did so little to sustain the president's veto.

"There was zero desire to sit down and talk about a way to get to a better outcome. Zero," Corker said. "To my knowledge, I don't know of a call from Obama to a single senator over this."

In a letter sent Tuesday to Reid, Obama said the bill would erode sovereign immunity principles that prevent foreign litigants "from second-guessing our counterterrorism operations and other actions that we take every day."

But proponents of the bill dismissed Obama's concerns as unpersuasive. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the Senate's No. 2 Republican, and other supporters said the bill is narrowly tailored and applies only to acts of terrorism that occur on U.S. soil.

Families of the victims and their attorneys dismissed concerns over the legislation as fear-mongering. "We rejoice in this triumph and look forward to our day in court and a time when we may finally get more answers regarding who was truly behind the attacks," said Terry Strada, national chairman of the 9/11 Families & Survivors United for Justice Against Terrorism.

The legislation gives victims' families the right to sue in U.S. court for any role that elements of the Saudi government may have played in the 2001 attacks. Courts would be permitted to waive a claim of foreign sovereign immunity when an act of terrorism occurred inside U.S. borders, according to the terms of the bill.

The measure has a provision that would allow the executive branch to halt the litigation if the executive branch proved in court that good-faith negotiations for a settlement with a nation were underway. That would lead to a 180-day pause, which could be repeatedly extended. This would preserve the executive branch's purview over foreign policy while still giving a pathway for family members to sue.

Obama vetoed the measure last week, telling lawmakers that the bill would make the U.S. vulnerable to retaliatory litigation.

In a letter sent Monday to a senior House member, Carter, the defense secretary, described the potential for foreign litigants to seek classified intelligence data and analysis, and sensitive operational information to support their cases in what could be an "intrusive discovery process."

The measure would amend a 1976 law that granted other countries broad immunity from U.S. lawsuits, allowing nations to be sued in federal court if they are found to have played any role in terrorist attacks that killed Americans on U.S. soil.

The Saudi government has denied any connection to the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks and has lobbied fiercely against the bill.

The bill's path reflects a growing desire to re-examine Washington's alliance with Saudi Arabia, which for decades has been a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, and deep ambivalence, especially among Republicans, of how to move forward.

Last week, the Senate voted on a resolution to restrict arms sales to Saudi Arabia until it stops targeting civilians in Yemen.

But the veto override was less a swipe at Saudi Arabia, Cornyn said, and more about giving victims a voice.

"All of us have come together and agreed that this is appropriate and the right thing to do," Cornyn said.

"When our interests diverge and it's a question of protecting American rights and American values, I think we should do that," he added. "This is not about severing our relationship with any ally. This is simply a matter of justice."

Information for this article was contributed by Richard Lardner, Erica Werner and Deb Riechmann of The Associated Press; by Jennifer Steinhauer of The New York Times; and by Karoun Demirjian and Juliet Eilperin of The Washington Post.

A Section on 09/29/2016

Upcoming Events