Congress approves bill to allow 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia

[Thəorətic Muslim]

You obviously don't understand the US system. If it passes with 2/3rd majority, his veto can be nulled. This is not that hard to understand, is it?

I'm pretty sure he understands the US legislative system better than you understand International Relations.

Up until now, the only way a foreign government could be held accountable for crimes/ allegations was through the International Court of Justice, which ironically the US isn't part of.

This bill will allow US citizens to sue not only the House of Saud but any foreign government for wrong doing against an American. The America journalists arrested in Iran can sue the Mullahs in an American Court with an American jury while the Iranian government will most likely be absentia. All cases will end in the favor of the American plaintiff.

A no win situation for Obama. Republicans may make this an election issue.

An issue they will drop if Trump wins or they get majority seats in Congress...

The 9/11 first responders got a piss poor health care bill, they the Republicans themselves rally around "Never forget".

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/jon-stewart-911-responders-bill-mitch-mcconnell-216685

 

[Rukarl]

I'm pretty sure he understands the US legislative system better than you understand International Relations.

Up until now, the only way a foreign government could be held accountable for crimes/ allegations was through the International Court of Justice, which ironically the US isn't part of.

This bill will allow US citizens to sue not only the House of Saud but any foreign government for wrong doing against an American. The America journalists arrested in Iran can sue the Mullahs in an American Court with an American jury while the Iranian government will most likely be absentia. All cases will end in the favor of the American plaintiff.

You just replied with some blabber. Who told you I did not understand bill and needed you to explain it to me? The bill is going forward regardless of whether you think if has negative or positive implications for US.

 

[That Guy]

You obviously don't understand the US system. If it passes with 2/3rd majority, his veto can be nulled. This is not that hard to understand, is it?

I understand it relatively well.

http://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidential-Vetoes/Presidential-Vetoes/

Obama CAN veto it, but congress can challenge the veto and essentially "override" it. Essentially, Obama must first veto, in order for congress to be able to challenge the veto.

It is unlikely that congress will actually challenge the veto, as it is very rarely done. A bill like this, one that is purely made for PR purposes, congress will not oppose the veto.

 

[Rukarl]

I understand it relatively well.

http://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidential-Vetoes/Presidential-Vetoes/

Obama CAN veto it, but congress can challenge the veto and essentially "override" it. Essentially, Obama must first veto, in order for congress to be able to challenge the veto.

It is unlikely that congress will actually challenge the veto, as it is very rarely done. A bill like this, one that is purely made for PR purposes, congress will not oppose the veto.

This is just your opinion. Let wait and see what happens.

 

[That Guy]

This is just your opinion. Let wait and see what happens.

It is not a baseless opinion, as I'm using historical precedent, and actual law.

Congress will not piss off their most important Muslim ally in the middle east, one that holds a tremendous amount of influence over other Muslim nations. Besides, KSA holds a lot of cards, and congress isn't stupid enough to piss them off.

 

[Rukarl]

It is not a baseless opinion, as I'm using historical precedent, and actual law.

Congress will not piss off their most important Muslim ally in the middle east, one that holds a tremendous amount of influence over other Muslim nations. Besides, KSA holds a lot of cards, and congress isn't stupid enough to piss them off.

As I said, lets wait and see. We can exchange opinion ad infintum but there is no point.

 

[That Guy]

As I said, lets wait and see. We can exchange opinion ad infintum but there is no point.

Sure, let's see.

This is strange logic. What's stopping them from suing US now? So all of the sudden people will starts suing US just because a bill allowing saudis being sued is passed?
This is just a desperate fear tactic by Obama.

Just so you know, individual citizens have never legally been able to sue foreign nations, and for a good reason. It would mean that any tom dick and harry could sue a foreign government for any little thing, which would negatively affect diplomatic relations between nations. When foriegn governments have been sued, it has always always been by other governments, not the citizenry.

This would set a precedent. If a US citizen can sue a foreign government, this would open the flood gates for citizens in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanstan...etc, to directly sue the US government for damages. It is a two way street, you cannot commit an action without an equal or opposite reaction.

 

[Rukarl]

Just so you know, individual citizens have never legally been able to sue foreign nations, and for a good reason. It would mean that any tom dick and harry could sue a foreign government for any little thing, which would negatively affect diplomatic relations between nations. When foriegn governments have been sued, it has always always been by other governments, not the citizenry.

This would set a precedent. If a US citizen can sue a foreign government, this would open the flood gates for citizens in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanstan...etc, to directly sue the US government for damages. It is a two way street, you cannot commit an action without an equal or opposite reaction.

I understand that, but I believe people are blowing out of proportion the potential adverse effects of this bill. You may see people sue x government here and there but I 100% doubt it will become the problem you're worried of. I think they should have just made this bill about Saudi Arabia, but I rather not get into that discussion here and now.

 

[That Guy]

I understand that, but I believe people are blowing out of proportion the potential adverse effects of this bill. You may see people sue x government here and there but I 100% doubt it will become the problem you're worried of. I think they should have just made this bill about Saudi Arabia, but I rather not get into that discussion here and now.

Really? How many families in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, do you think would love to get a chance to sue the US? It won't be 1 or 2, the US would face a multitude of class action lawsuits. Drone strikes, night raids, wedding bombings, hospital bombings, soldiers going on a rampage, etc. If the US actually goes through with this, it would cross a line that it would never be able to come back from. Even if the US specified it to precisely the Saudi Kingdom, it would still have the exact same affect, actually it would probably be worse, in some cases.

To the people whom support this bill, they're looking at this with rose tinted glasses, and ignoring the issues that this would cause. It could very well redefine how international diplomacy works.

 

[Madali]

It would set precedent, which would lead to citizens of other nations being able to directly sue the US government, and that is the main issue.

But you're right that it would damage the US economy.

Unfortunately, it's not about fairness, it's about power. USA attacked Iraq without UN approval. That did not exactly set any precedent for other countries attacking USA without UN approval, did it?

Also, this is not new, is it? Already Americans sued Iran and the American courts seized Iranian assets and awarded them.

However, I agree with you that's it's extremely unlikely it will actually happen in the case of KSA. In the extremely unlikely event that the bill passes, I doubt the courts will find KSA guilty. So far, there hasn't been any evidence from USA side that the government of Saudi was responsible. If the court awards the people, that means that the court is proclaiming that the government of KSA was responsible for the deaths of American citizens. Then the issue won't just about paying for damages, it would actually mean that the court has ruled that KSA, has in a way, waged war against America. That's a huge implication.

 

[Rukarl]

Really? How many families in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, do you think would love to get a chance to sue the US? It won't be 1 or 2, the US would face a multitude of class action lawsuits. Drone strikes, night raids, wedding bombings, hospital bombings, soldiers going on a rampage, etc. If the US actually goes through with this, it would cross a line that it would never be able to come back from. Even if the US specified it to precisely the Saudi Kingdom, it would still have the exact same affect, actually it would probably be worse, in some cases.

To the people whom support this bill, they're looking at this with rose tinted glasses, and ignoring the issues that this would cause. It could very well redefine how international diplomacy works.

I keep explaining something simple to you but it seems it goes right through you. Those "many families in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan" can sue US right now with or without this bill. You are the one assuming this bill will somehow make everyone sue US left and right. You have nothing but opinions and are acting as if you're somehow purely objective. As I said to you, time will clarify this situation.

 

[cloud4000]

This bill is being specifically created to sue Saudi Arabia for events pertaining to events resulting in 9/11. Legally, in the US you cannot sue foreign countries in US courts due to a law called FSIA. Details about the law here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Sovereign_Immunities_Act

In fact, families tried to sue Saudi Arabia for 9/11 in 2008 but couldn't because of the law.

It's a bad idea for such a law to go into effect because it will open up a can of worms.

 

[Pandora]

I really hope this law is passed so that every one can sue these Saudis and Americans all the way to Sunday.

 

[That Guy]

I keep explaining something simple to you but it seems it goes right through you. Those "many families in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan" can sue US right now with or without this bill. You are the one assuming this bill will somehow make everyone sue US left and right. You have nothing but opinions and are acting as if you're somehow purely objective. As I said to you, time will clarify this situation.

No they can't, they CAN NOT. They can sue individuals and corporations, BUT NOT GOVERNMENTS.

Your explanation is completely and utter false.

I have presented factual, evidence based points, all you've done is essentially say 'you're wrong, because reasons' and 'time will prove you wrong' as if that is suppose to completely contradict what I've said.

Am I purely objective? There is no such thing, but at least I'm backing my arguments with logic, while all you're doing is literally making things up.

 

[That Guy]

Unfortunately, it's not about fairness, it's about power. USA attacked Iraq without UN approval. That did not exactly set any precedent for other countries attacking USA without UN approval, did it?

I'd argue that the comparison is flawed. It isn't just about power, it is about financial and diplomatic issues.

Also, this is not new, is it? Already Americans sued Iran and the American courts seized Iranian assets and awarded them.

The US gov sued them, on behave of their citizenry; US citizens didn't directly sue.

However, I agree with you that's it's extremely unlikely it will actually happen in the case of KSA. In the extremely unlikely event that the bill passes, I doubt the courts will find KSA guilty. So far, there hasn't been any evidence from USA side that the government of Saudi was responsible. If the court awards the people, that means that the court is proclaiming that the government of KSA was responsible for the deaths of American citizens. Then the issue won't just about paying for damages, it would actually mean that the court has ruled that KSA, has in a way, waged war against America. That's a huge implication.

pretty much.

You don't make any sense at all. This bill is about Americans and not Iraqis, Afghanis etc. Iraqis can sue US right now, what on earth does this bill have to do with for example Iraqis ability to sue US?

Why don't you bother paying attention?

It sets a precedent, what don't you understand about "precedent".

Are you stupid, or do you just pretend to not read and understand other people's comment?

I'm done here.