Congress Overrides Obama’s Veto of 9/11 Lawsuit Bill

Victims’ families will gain the right to sue Saudi Arabia. But the bill could have other effects.

Pete Souza/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Update (9/28/2016): The House has voted to override Obama’s veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, ensuring the bill will become law. This marks the first override of a presidential veto in Obama’s presidency.

The Senate voted 97-1 on Wednesday to override President Barack Obama’s veto of a controversial bill that has pitted families of 9/11 victims against the president. The override is the first in Obama’s seven and a half years in office.

The original bill, passed by the Senate in May and the House earlier this month, would allow American citizens to sue foreign governments complicit in terrorist attacks on US soil, giving victims a way to receive monetary compensation in the wake of tragedy.

Opponents of the bill, including Obama, have said it could open the door to suits by other countries against US diplomats and service members abroad. The override now goes to a vote in the House of Representatives, which is expected to follow the Senate’s lead and make the bill law.

The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act does have limitations in place, stipulating that suits can only be filed for “an act of international terrorism in the United States” and that foreign governments cannot be held liable for “mere negligence.” The US secretary of state may intervene to halt a lawsuit if the United States is already in talks with the foreign country to resolve the issue. The US attorney general may also seek to put suits on hold for 180 days, subject to extension.

In a veto message released last Friday, Obama expressed his concerns that the bill would imperil “sovereign immunity” for governments that are not designated as official state sponsors of terrorism. Governments that are deemed state sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran, can be held accountable under the 1996 Flatow Amendment to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

In the case of families of 9/11 victims, however, their claims have faced a hurdle. Saudi Arabia, the country they want to sue, is not labeled a state sponsor of terrorism by the State Department. In fact, Saudi Arabia is one of the United States’ closest allies in the Middle East. But 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001, were Saudi nationals.  

In his statement, the president said the bill would be “detrimental to US national interests more broadly” and argued that it “would neither protect Americans from terrorist attacks nor improve the effectiveness of our response to such attacks.”

But most members of Congress, including Democrats, seem to disagree. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), widely viewed as the successor to retiring Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), told CNN the veto was “a disappointing decision that will be swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress.” Reid was the only senator who voted to support the president’s veto.

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton also supports the bill, breaking with the president and saying she would sign the bill into law if she were president, according to CNN.

The House is widely expected to vote the same way. If at least two-thirds of House members vote to override the veto, the bill would become law, giving 9/11 victim families a chance at compensation and the president a legislative defeat.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate