We cant have the ādefendantsā opening the possibility of ādiscoveryā in this caseā¦could prove pretty embarrassing!!!
So it goes both ways, right? Some family in Yemen can sue the USA because we killed somebody in a drone strike that missed the intended target?
This bill has all the classic symptoms of the rule of unintended consequences. This may come back to bite this country big time.
It might also do some good. The drone program is still a disorganized mess; perhaps the looming threat of lawsuits will force people to use more discretion.
Or pay attention to the war in Yemen which seemingly goes unnoticed in this country.
Or it could act as a catalyst for our own ātruth and reconciliationā tribunal. I think there is still information or ādiscoveryā concerning Saudi involvement or at least knowledge. If nothing else, it can at least make a number of members of the Bush administration a bit more uncomfortable.
āThe Saudi government also hired its own force of lobbyists ā some former members of Congress themselvesā to campaign against the legislation.ā
Wanna take a shower or burn down their offices after reading this.
Can we expect a bunch of incoming lawsuits over torture soon?
Cue up the Republicans complaining about how we need tort reform in 5,4,3,2,1ā¦
Sounds like a diplomatās worst nightmare when other countries start thinking about retaliating.
What forum will they sue in? A US court - canāt the Saudis just claim lack of jurisdiction? World Court - which we donāt even recognize?
If they sue the Saudi govāt, does that get at the members of the Saudi royal family who gave immense financial support to al Qaeda? Do the Saudis have the same laws governing destruction of evidence?
NCSteve? Other attorneys?
This may be a principle thing, but rubber on road is another question.
Sure hope so
Al Franken and Klobuchar both told the Star Tribune last night they would vote to override. Hereās Frankenās quote:
Franken said he doesnāt believe the law will have that effect because the United States doesnāt commit acts of terror.
I guess that is up to the courts to decide. If I am at a wedding and a US drone kills over half of the wedding guests by mistake, one could consider that an act of terror. Just saying.
Added: Personally, I believe this is just a political grandstanding bill for the ignorant masses. The billās language has to have a very high bar to prove terror intent. Otherwise, the US could be in a world of hurt.
It also has all the classic symptoms of election year politics. Senators and Reps facing re-election in November (or even beyond that) donāt want to be on record as having blocked the rights of 9/11 victimsā families to seek justice. The long-term implications of this legislation are a problem for another day (and likely for someone else to deal with).
President Obama leaves office less than 4 months from now regardless. So he can afford to look at the big picture.
Good lordā¦the hypocrisy is deep in this. Soā¦you can āsueā Saudi Arabia but FOR GODāS SAKE we had to go to war with Iraq and spend MILLION/BILLIONs of dollars from our treasury, shake up the middle East, etc. etc. and NOW the āI AM SO STRONG AND IāLL SHOW THAT OBAMA!ā Senate is overriding the veto which will open up useless legal BS to the WORLD in an attempt to blame someone ELSE for your colossal FU in the aughts? Get rid of ALL of them. I wanna start over.
This legislation is so stupidā¦the dumbest ābiapartisanā legislative political messaging farce Iāve seen in my lifeā¦and itās only getting close to overriding a veto because out representatives are such chicken-shit selfish cowards that they donāt want to have to risk their re-elections on having to explain to their imbecile constituencies why this bill is damaging, dangerous, will raise all sorts of Constutional questions and crises and, ultimately, will turn out to be nothing more than an ill-advised farce.
We enact this.
Cases get filed.
Most courts dismiss the stupid claims for lack of jurisdiction.
Dubya-packed Courts issue judgment and orders after empanelling angry white juries in places like TX.
Saudi Arabia scoffs at the orders and judgments.
GOPers/Teatrolls in Congress try to pass more legislation to whatā¦punish Saudi Arabia for disobeying? Ordering sanctions for disobeying? Order POTUS to do something about it?
Negotiations and relations with Saudi Arabia thrown to the shit and POTUSā and his administrationās ability to exercise Constitutional powers within their purview totally hampered and frustrated.
Meanwhile, Afghanistan and Pakistan see whatās happening and get wise, enacting their own mirror-image legislation.
We drone the fuck out of some village, killing some civilians.
Families file suit in Afghanistan or Pakistan or wherever.
Afghanistan or Pakistan or whereverās courts issue orders and judgmentsā¦things we donāt like, such as āhand over all your documents regarding the drone strikes.ā
POTUS attempts to engage Afghanistan and Pakistan or wherever in negotiations for trade deals, defense agreements, treaties, whatever.
Afghanistanās or Pakistanās or whereverās government tells POTUS and his administration no negotiations, go fuck yourselves until you obey our courtsā orders and judgments.
Complete fucking foreign relations fiasco, POTUSās constitutional powers hampered, frustrated and undermined, international relations and even existing agreements and treaties threatened, etc. etc. etc.
The shitshow this could cause is absurd.
THE DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED FOR THIS SHOULD BE FUCKING ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES. COWARDS COWARDS COWARDS.
The fact that Obama and Reid,who are not ever running for office again, are the only two remaining with the balls to stand up to this feel-good political messaging legislation says all you need to know about the rest of them.
How about 500,000 dead civilians from the bombing of Baghdad or whatever the fucking count is?
I canāt express how absolutely, infuriatingly absurd this is.
If only the Republicans voted so strongly to support their health care the last 15 years
The bill itself specifies US federal civil court. It does not appear to grant the reciprocal rights-- of foreign sovereigns to file counter-claims. Maybe someone with subject matter expertise can weigh in? Hereās the bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2040
You are in law. I work in legal regulation.
I think you and I based on this post had almost the exact same thoughts. Itās a lot of smoke and circus and not a damn one of them it seems other than the constitutional law scholar in the White House is looking at the long term affect of what opening this door could result in.
ESPECIALLY since 9/11.
While I can sympathize with where the idea is coming from (restitution for innocent people dying at the hands of terrorists), you canāt even call this bill a slippery slope. Itās a fucking slip nā slide down the side of Mount Everest.