Congress Votes To Override President Obama's Sept. 11 Lawsuit Veto The legislation allows families of victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue the Saudi Arabian government. The override is the first of Obama's presidency.
NPR logo

Congress Overrides Obama's Veto On Sept. 11 Lawsuit Bill

  • Download
  • <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/495709481/495736426" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript
Congress Overrides Obama's Veto On Sept. 11 Lawsuit Bill

Congress Overrides Obama's Veto On Sept. 11 Lawsuit Bill

  • Download
  • <iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/495709481/495736426" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript

RENEE MONTAGNE, HOST:

President Obama almost got through eight years in office without having any of his vetoes overridden by a hostile Congress. But today, the Senate will vote to do just that. The bill in question is popular with both Republicans and Democrats. It would allow families of the victims of the September 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for allegedly supporting those attackers, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals. On Monday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest explained the president's decision.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

JOSH EARNEST: We're not just concerned about the impact that this bill would have on the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia. We're deeply concerned about the impact that this bill would have on the U.S. relationship with countries all around the world. And that's why the president vetoed it at the end of last week.

MONTAGNE: The House is likely to take up the override veto by the end of the week. And for more, we turned to NPR's congressional correspondent, Ailsa Chang. Good morning.

AILSA CHANG, BYLINE: Good morning, Renee.

MONTAGNE: Before we get into this probable first-ever override of a veto, take us back for a moment for a look at this bill.

CHANG: Yeah, so this is a bill that would give 9/11 families the right to pursue legal claims against any country they feel played some role in any terrorism attack on U.S. soil. In this case, it would be Saudi Arabia. These families have been looking to demand monetary compensation for years. Many of them believe Saudi Arabia was somehow involved in the attacks. Saudi Arabia has denied this adamantly. And the bill has been circulating the Capitol for a really long time. It just never got to the floor and passed until this year.

MONTAGNE: But can't these families do that already? I mean, civil lawsuits have been allowed against state sponsors of terrorism. Have they not?

CHANG: That's absolutely correct. Congress has allowed Americans to sue countries that had been designated as state sponsors of terrorism. But that list is limited to only three countries right now - Iran, Syria and Sudan.

MONTAGNE: And those are the key words - state sponsors of terrorism.

CHANG: Right. And you notice that Saudi Arabia is not on that list. The White House says those designations are made only after very careful review by national security, intelligence and foreign policy officials. They're not decisions that should be left to private litigants and judges in courtrooms. And what this 9/11 bill does is it allows lawsuits against any country that any U.S. citizen believes helped or financed a terrorism attack on U.S. soil.

MONTAGNE: And, of course, Saudi Arabia is an ally - a longtime ally - of the United States. But, Ailsa, the president vetoed this on a bigger principle that even some senators are now worried about.

CHANG: That's right. There are a lot of concerns about a principle known as sovereign immunity. It's this idea that a country should remain immune from lawsuits in the courts of another country. It's a long-held principle under international law. And although there are some very limited exceptions to that principle, some lawmakers and the White House believe this 9/11 bill carves out too expansive of an exception.

And they fear that other countries might reciprocate and drag U.S. government officials or members of our own military into lawsuits in foreign courts under this theory that those people helped cause some injury abroad. In fact, Republican Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee told me that was his biggest concern right now about the bill.

BOB CORKER: Let's face it, we're the greatest nation on Earth. We have more involvements around the world than any country. We've got assets deployed all around the world, more than any country. So if sovereign immunity issues recede, we're the nation that is most exposed.

CHANG: So he's worried that the U.S. would be exposed to a flood of litigation. And what would the discovery process look like in such litigation? Might it force the U.S. to hand over sensitive national security information? Those are all concerns that are bubbling around the Capitol right now, just as this override vote is upon Congress.

MONTAGNE: And what do supporters of this bill say to those concerns?

CHANG: Well, essentially there's a perception that it's a little alarmist to think this bill is going to erode the principle of sovereign immunity, that there will be a flood of litigation. Many lawmakers think the White House's concerns are a bit overblown, that the concept of sovereign immunity is not absolute anyway.

There are already exceptions to it. And they feel that the White House's concerns about interfering with our global relationships are a bit overblown. This bill is ultimately about giving 9/11 victims a chance to be heard in court to the supporters of the bill. Here's Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon. He's a senior member of the Intelligence Committee.

RON WYDEN: The issue it's fundamentally about is whether someone would have the opportunity to raise their concerns in the judicial system. It's not a judgment about how a case would come out. But it seems to me that it is appropriate - particularly in light of the families - that they should have a chance to raise their concerns in court.

MONTAGNE: OK, Ailsa, so this idea of the families being able to at least experience some sense of justice and raise their concerns, I imagine made it easier for lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to embrace the bill originally. But it takes two-thirds of each chamber to override a presidential veto, and it sounds like there are some lawmakers who are beginning to think about backing off.

CHANG: Well, concerns do seem a little late in the game now. But remember, when this bill was working its way through Congress, it had an enormous amount of goodwill because it was considered a bill that helped 9/11 families. Everyone is onboard with that idea. But then this bill sailed through both chambers through voice votes - or a voice vote in the House, what's called unanimous consent in the Senate, meaning members didn't have to go on the record as a yes or no vote on the bill.

But now this override vote is going to be the first time members will have to attach their names to a yes or no vote on this bill. And that's why many of them are just beginning to study the bill and are just beginning to have concerns about it.

MONTAGNE: Still though, this override is expected to be successful.

CHANG: That's right. Leaders in both chambers are confident about that.

MONTAGNE: NPR's congressional correspondent Ailsa Chang, thanks very much.

CHANG: You're welcome.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.