Support NeoGAF

[Sub_Level]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591

On the eve of the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the House unanimously passed on Friday controversial legislation clearing the way for the families of victims to sue Saudi Arabia if that country is found legally responsible for helping back the deadly terrorist acts.

The bill, which passed the Senate in May, now heads to President Obama's desk. The White House strongly opposes the legislation and worries the legislation leaves the U.S. open to similar suits.

How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

UPDATE

New York (CNN)BREAKING NEWS: Barack Obama vetoed Friday a bill that would allow family members of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia. The White House claimed it could expose US diplomats and servicemen to litigation in other countries.
Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress say they'll override Obama's veto next week.

Obama has now issued 12 vetoes. If successful, Congress' override will be the first of Obama's presidency.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/21/p...udi-9-11-bill0835PMVODtopLink&linkId=29142698

Seems like the law will pass. :lol

Interesting months ahead.

 

[DBT85]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

If you think the US haven't done anything wrong that might mean similar lawsuits against you, then I have some bad news for you.

It's a ridiculous bill though.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

Sure.

But the CIA has done a lot of dirty things over the years

 

[Brakke]

Totally ridiculous bill.

 

[Kolx]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

lol

 

[Nutter]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

Lets start with all the folks who lost their families to accidental drone attack deaths.

I am not sure the US would be able to handle the amount of lawsuits against them.

 

[Sub_Level]

lol

 

[FyreWulff]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

It's a stupid bill because it basically says "the entire world is subject to US legal jurisdiction" so other countries will start doing the same with their courts and when we go "no you don't" then they'll say "but you say you have it over us, so even stevens"

 

[Abounder]

It would be somewhat ironic if our imperialism ended because of lawsuits around the globe. Anyway I hope it passes so we can go to a sane paradigm of not bombing people/creating more terrorists.

...since democrats are not stepping in line.

“Wherever the trail may lead, it should be followed. We need justice.” - Hillary Clinton

Wonder how the optics are going to look

 

[DragonKnight]

So can Native Americans and blacks sue Europe and America now?

 

[Harry Stewart]

Dumb and unworkable. Saudi Arabia deserves the shit it gets for supporting extremism throughout the world, but they have every right to find this idea as laughable as the US government would find families of victims of drone strikes suing Obama.

 

[HMD]

If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

Americans are so delusional it's goddamn scary.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

Lol America

 

[Sub_Level]

It's a stupid bill because it basically says "the entire world is subject to US legal jurisdiction" so other countries will start doing the same with their courts and when we go "no you don't" then they'll say "but you say you have it over us, so even stevens"

But US citizens have sued foreign governments in the past already. It's rare but it has happened. I think it's just for extreme cases.

 

[HyperCroutons]

I know victims of terror attacks have sued countries responsible for certain terror attacks before for example American victims families of the Lockerbie, Scotland attack in 1988 received payments from Libya for their connection to the attack. I guess the bill would make it easier to do this but it could open up a big can of worms in international politics.

Here's the article on it: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6158491&page=1

 

[DavidDesu]

If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

So you genuinely think America is a saint. You sound so naive if you're being genuine. Like a 10 year old naive. American foreign policy and meddling by the military/CIA etc is fucking evil.

 

[Balphon]

I know victims of terror attacks have sued countries responsible for certain terror attacks before for example American victims families of the Lockerbie, Scotland attack in 1988 received payments from Libya for their connection to the attack. I guess the bill would make it easier to do this but it could open up a big can of worms in international politics.

Here's the article on it: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6158491&page=1

The FSIA exemption relied upon in those cases essentially requires the defendant county to be designated as a state sponsor of terrorism by the State Department. The bill here essentially creates a new exemption with similar terms which has no such limitation. As such, it is significantly broader (perhaps unconstitutionally so, though that is debatable) and makes it possible to sue, not just easier.

Likewise, as that article says, the resolution in Libya was accomplished via international agreement rather than suit in federal court: https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/109771.pdf

As for the bill, it's too broad and I think the concern over making the US/government officials more vulnerable to suit in foreign courts is an apt one.

 

[Sub_Level]

Then the question becomes if Saudi Arabia should be considered a state sponsor of terrorism.

 

[HeySeuss]

So this is basically conservatives getting people all riled up with 9/11 feelings so that Barrack "the scary Muslim" Hussein Obama can veto it and stir up patriotism to try to help Trump.

Just gross.

 

[Balphon]

Sure, if you wanted to turn this from a minor deal into a colossal one.

Classification as a state sponsor of terrorism has numerous consequences beyond being rendered vulnerable to suit in the FSIA, to say nothing of the diplomatic repercussions of even pretending to consider such an action.

 

[2MF]

What does "sue Saudi Arabia" mean? Why is it up to the US government to allow Americans to do it? Where will the lawsuits be filed?

I just don't understand.

 

[TheRealTalker]

A can of worms might open up from this

as in the International Suing Wars™

it will be told to generations to come

 

[Brakke]

So this is basically conservatives getting people all riled up with 9/11 feelings so that Barrack "the scary Muslim" Hussein Obama can veto it and stir up patriotism to try to help Trump.

Just gross.

I get that people skip out on reading OPs sometimes but at least glance at the first goddamn sentence:

On the eve of the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the House unanimously passed on Friday controversial legislation clearing the way for the families of victims to sue Saudi Arabia if that country is found legally responsible for helping back the deadly terrorist acts.​

Unanimously.

 

[Balphon]

What does "sue Saudi Arabia" mean?

Literally what it says: to sue the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and/or its agents for damages.

Why is it up to the US government to allow Americans to do it?

Because sovereign governments are traditionally generally immune from suit by non-sovereign entities under various principles of international and US constitutional law. There is a statutory regime in the US that attempts to codify those principles and provide for a narrow range of scenarios where such suits are permissible.

Where will the lawsuits be filed?

The United States Federal Court system.

 

[elrechazado]

So this is basically conservatives getting people all riled up with 9/11 feelings so that Barrack "the scary Muslim" Hussein Obama can veto it and stir up patriotism to try to help Trump.

Just gross.

Yes, all of the democrats providing a veto override potential are definitely also part of this conspiracy.

 

[Mechanized]

This bill is insane.

 

[2MF]

Literally what it says: to sue the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and/or its agents for damages.



Because sovereign governments are traditionally generally immune from suit by non-sovereign entities under various principles of international and US constitutional law. There is a statutory regime in the US that attempts to codify those principles and provide for a narrow range of scenarios where such suits are permissible.



The United States Federal Court system.

Thanks. I still don't understand very well how Saudi Arabia will be forced to care about this, but that gives some starting points.

 

[Verelios]

I get that people skip out on reading OPs sometimes but at least glance at the first goddamn sentence:

On the eve of the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the House unanimously passed on Friday controversial legislation clearing the way for the families of victims to sue Saudi Arabia if that country is found legally responsible for helping back the deadly terrorist acts.​

Unanimously.

I'd like to see what happens if Obama just said fuck it, and signed away. People always like pushing the envelope to see if it bursts.

 

[Balphon]

I get that people skip out on reading OPs sometimes but at least glance at the first goddamn sentence:

On the eve of the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the House unanimously passed on Friday controversial legislation clearing the way for the families of victims to sue Saudi Arabia if that country is found legally responsible for helping back the deadly terrorist acts.​

Unanimously.

Yeah, there's a steep hill to climb if Obama wants to actually fight off a veto override, but crazier things have happened I guess.

 

[Jarmel]

How did this even pass the Senate?

 

[Dan]

It'd be kinda nice if everyone just let Obama veto it and then quietly let the issue disappear. This seems way too broadly problematic and short-sighted to be allowed to move forward.

I get that people skip out on reading OPs sometimes but at least glance at the first goddamn sentence:

On the eve of the 15th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the House unanimously passed on Friday controversial legislation clearing the way for the families of victims to sue Saudi Arabia if that country is found legally responsible for helping back the deadly terrorist acts.​

Unanimously.

The vote in the Senate was unanimous, too.

 

[DietRob]

It's amazing how the house can pass complete bullshit bills with relative ease if the headline in the paper will look bad for Obama or democrats in general.

I can imagine some headlines now. Disgusting.


Also, to the OP what you are missing is drone strikes.

 

[Balphon]

How did this even pass the Senate?

By voice vote, months ago: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2040/all-actions

The vote in the Senate was unanimous, too.

Technically, no, but it may as well have been.

 

[Dan]

By voice vote, months ago: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2040/all-actions



Technically, no, but it may as well have been.

Well, true, I guess. There's some nuance there.

 

[TheRealTalker]

I bet you the republicans are betting, even hoping that Obama will veto it.

PR stunt at its finest.... like Brexit if this actually doesn't get veto'd then they'll just be as flabbergasted as everyone else and would likely try and blame Obama again if it turns against them and the whole entire world begins to sue the US for things like Drones, to War Crimes, to torture, to coups, to environmental issues.... the list is endless

 

[RustyNails]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

Goodness. How about the millions of people around the world who have been affected by America's actions to topple governments? Of course, the US wont pay, but it will give those countries incredible leverage and a PR victory for the ages.

 

[BoosterDuck]

So can Native Americans and blacks sue Europe and America now?

America's the land of the free bro, not the marginalized.

 

[Balphon]

Thanks. I still don't understand very well how Saudi Arabia will be forced to care about this, but that gives some starting points.

To the extent they have assets in the US or that US jurisdiction can otherwise reach they have to care about getting haled into court here. But, yeah, it can get really complicated really fast.

 

[bionic77]

This bill is insane.

Politics world wide seem to be insane these days.

 

[Supermanisdead]

so how would someone even go about suing saudi arabia

 

[Balphon]

so how would someone even go about suing saudi arabia

Same way you sue anybody else: go to the court with $400 and some paperwork.

 

[Ominym]

so how would someone even go about suing saudi arabia

Let alone make them pay any sort of compensation? "Yo' all Saudi Arabia you didn't show for your court date so pay us $3,000,000 pls thx."

Did anyone with a brain think this shit through at any level?

 

[Alo0oy]

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/house-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n645591



How would the US being open to being sued in similar situations be a bad thing? If we haven't done anything wrong then we don't have anything to worry about, right, or am I missing something from Obama's argument?

The article also mentions that the Senate may be able to override Obama's veto with a supermajority since democrats are not stepping in line.

lol, half the countries in the world would probably sue. I can't think of a single non-white country that the US hasn't violated somehow or some way.

 

[johnsmith]

Why is this ridiculous. Fuck Saudi Arabia and everything about them. If they lose every single asset they own in America, good.

It passes unanimously. How often does that happen? Obama should not veto this.

 

[Balphon]

Let alone make them pay any sort of compensation? "Yo' all Saudi Arabia you didn't show for your court date so pay us $3,000,000 pls thx."

Did anyone with a brain think this shit through at any level?

A court could easily freeze Saudi assets in the US and/or force their divestment to pay a judgment:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...mic-fallout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html

It passes unanimously. How often does that happen? Obama should not veto this.

All the time, but generally not for something with as much mixed press as this.

 

[Mael]

This is a colossal stupidity considering the US doesn't even allow or recognize the Court of the Hague to begin with.
It opens the can of worms that basically foreign countries can sue the US for damage too.
I don't think it's unreasonable to not trust the US justice system to begin with but how about the US being sued by Russian citizen in Russia would look then? or China? or even the EU?
Heck there's probably a good case Palestinian can make about suing the USA and Israel pretty much everywhere but the USA or Israel as it is.
It's as monumentally stupid as allowing countries to be sued by corporations.

 

[Ominym]

A court could easily freeze Saudi assets in the US and/or force their divestment to pay a judgment:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...mic-fallout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html

Yes, you could. We could even go so far as to threaten war.

The real question is will we? And that answer is no on both fronts and it's because of this that no payment is going to happen.

 

[Alo0oy]

Why is this ridiculous. Fuck Saudi Arabia and everything about them. If they lose every single asset they own in America, good.

It passes unanimously. How often does that happen? Obama should not veto this.

Yeah, I don't understand why people are against this. "It opens the US for lawsuits" is not an argument someone that cares about justice should worry about.

 

[LordOfChaos]

I dunno, on one hand it would be like, yeah, justice, but it's an odd precedent that I don't think will go through. This was just three years before 9/11, imagine if these families could all of a sudden sue America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Maybe they should be able to, at that. I dunno.

 

[Alo0oy]

This is a colossal stupidity considering the US doesn't even allow or recognize the Court of the Hague to begin with.
It opens the can of worms that basically foreign countries can sue the US for damage too.
I don't think it's unreasonable to not trust the US justice system to begin with but how about the US being sued by Russian citizen in Russia would look then? or China? or even the EU?
Heck there's probably a good case Palestinian can make about suing the USA and Israel pretty much everywhere but the USA or Israel as it is.
It's as monumentally stupid as allowing countries to be sued by corporations.

I don't understand this argument. Are you against the US being responsible for terrible actions they commit?

As for the second bolded text...WTF?