Senate overrides Obama's 9/11 bill veto

[Hazir]

I must say that I am surprised about this, and am very curious as to what it will mean in actual cases brought before the courts.

Should have said 'Congress' in the title of course.

[RandBlade]

I think this is more about hype than any real significant court cases we are likely to see. It's never been proven that Saudis backed the hijackers though of course nor has it been attempted to be proven which a court case would do.

As always the sooner the Saudis are treated as the contemptible scumbags they are rather than "allies" the better.

[Hazir]

I think that the problem is a lot bigger than that; 15 of the terrorists were Saudi Nationals, and a lot of the money that kept AQ in business can be traced back to Saudi Arabia. It should surprise nobody that there are enough grounds for capable lawyers to create claims that won't be thrown out of court for lack of merit.

This could very easily become a very costly law for the Saudis. I can't say I'm unhappy about anything that messes with the Kingdom of Evil.

[LittleFuzzy]

I must say that I am surprised about this, and am very curious as to what it will mean in actual cases brought before the courts.

Should have said 'Congress' in the title of course.

It means we'll see a lot more cases brought against the US for the deaths we cause abroad. Stupid fucks. I really hoped they'd passed it initially just because it was an election year and there would be zero risk since there'd be a veto by an outgoing President.

[Loki]

A bunch of Republicans said as much, and promptly voted for the bill anyway.

[Hazir]

It means we'll see a lot more cases brought against the US for the deaths we cause abroad. Stupid fucks. I really hoped they'd passed it initially just because it was an election year and there would be zero risk since there'd be a veto by an outgoing President.

For that to happen other countries would have to lift the immunity of the USA too. This law in itself is too limited in scope to bring that about. It may lower the threshold for that kind of action.

[LittleFuzzy]

For that to happen other countries would have to lift the immunity of the USA too. This law in itself is too limited in scope to bring that about. It may lower the threshold for that kind of action.

Ah, but if you can have someone with standing here in the US, we're just one (constitutionally valid) equal protection argument from striking down our local immunity, because the law right now violates that aspect of the 14th amendment.

[Hazir]

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean with 'local immunity' nor what it means in relation to this law.

[Hazir]

According to the NYT Senate Republicans are considering revoking the bill, because they only now start realizing what they have done. Obama didn't warn them enough about the potential fall out it seems

[Aimless]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/29/po...oter_expansion

This is some Brexit level stuff. How dumb are politicians? We're talking about literally the first problem with this law that anyone with more than half a brain will think of.

[Veldan Rath]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/29/po...oter_expansion

This is some Brexit level stuff. How dumb are politicians? We're talking about literally the first problem with this law that anyone with more than half a brain will think of.

Election year panic.