Congress hands Obama first veto override

Congress overwhelmingly rejected President Barack Obama’s bid to derail legislation allowing families of the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to sue the government of Saudi Arabia, handing him the first veto override of his presidency during his final year in office.

The Senate took the first step Wednesday, voting 97-1 to override Obama's veto of the 9/11 bill. The House quickly followed with a 348-77 vote.


The sweeping popularity of the legislation — known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act — made it basically inevitable that the measure would ultimately become law, despite fierce objections from the Obama administration. The bill, known informally as JASTA, sailed through the Senate with no objections in the spring and was voice-voted in the House earlier this month.

“This legislation is really about pursuing justice,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), one of the chief sponsors of the bill, along with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). “The families have already suffered too much. They’ve already suffered untold tragedy, of course, and they deserve to find a path to closure that only justice can provide.”

Schumer said "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," Schumer added. "Even if that pursuit causes some diplomatic discomforts."

The White House -- which had done little in the way of direct outreach with Capitol Hill, senators said -- unleashed a torrent of anger at Congress, with press secretary Josh Earnest arguing that voting to override was "an abdication of their basic responsibilities as elected representatives of the American people.”

"This is the single most embarrassing thing the United States Senate as done possibly since 1983," Earnest said shortly after the Senate vote but before the House followed suit. "To have members of the United States Senate only recently informed of the negative impact of this bill on our servicemembers and our diplomats is in itself embarrassing.”

The sole person siding with Obama to sustain the presidential veto was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), whose vote was seen more as an act of loyalty to the second-term president. In a letter made public Wednesday, Obama disclosed that he and Reid spoke directly about the president's concerns about the bill.

"JASTA sweeps more broadly than 9/11 or Saudi Arabia, and its far-reaching implications would threaten to undermine important principles that protect the United States, including our U.S. Armed Forces and other officials overseas, without making us any safer," Obama wrote to Reid.

Despite how easily the veto is set to be overridden on Capitol Hill, lawmakers are not without a sense of buyer’s remorse. As top administration officials began to warn Congress about JASTA’s potential ramifications — in particular, that foreign governments would began to retaliate against U.S. officials abroad — a handful of influential senators said they had concerns about the measure, including those who initially co-sponsored the bill.

Over in the House, both the chairman and the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee have circulated letters opposing JASTA.

Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said he would vote to override Obama’s veto. But in a floor speech Wednesday, Cardin stressed that his vote was “not without concern” of the “potential unintended consequences” of the legislation.

“There is a concern of unintended consequences, including irresponsible applications to U.S. international activities by other countries,” Cardin said. “While I have faith and confidence in the American legal system, the same faith does not necessarily extend to the fairness of the legal systems of other countries that may claim that they are taking similar action against America when they’re not.”

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) also aired “tremendous concerns” what the legislation would do to the principle of “sovereign immunity” for foreign governments, although he said the 9/11 families “do deserve an outlet … of seeking justice in this particular case.”

Though it applies to any act of terrorism on U.S. soil, JASTA has long been viewed as focusing on Saudi Arabia’s alleged role on Sept. 11, 2001. The so-called “28 pages,” part of a 2002 probe that was declassified in July, included some indications that appear to suggest links between a handful of Saudis in the United States and two of the 9/11 hijackers.

“We are still learning the facts, but there is mounting evidence that the Saudi government – or at least operations and operatives within the Saudi government – aided and abetted one of the most massive crimes in the United States,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said Wednesday .

He continued: “In our system, the truth behind those facts deserves to be presented in court – a court of law where fairness and justice will be assured.”