# Should Congress override Obama's veto on Saudi waiver? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 24, 2016, 9:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714 "2016-09-24T09:52:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/121 "2016-09-30T12:55:35Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > [Small hijack - you can answer in a PM if you think it will derail this thread.] > > This what gets me, and always has. Under what principle should the victim families receive _anything at all_? If some crazed Canadian came down and blew up my neighbors Subaru with him in it, I wouldn’t go haring off on a quest to make Canada pay his family. Hell, if it was a Utahan who killed him. Other than the sheer size of the body count, what gives with the “payments to victim families?” As I understand it, the analogous accusation is not that “some crazed Canadian,” attacked the Subaru, but that the government of Canada helped select, fund, and train a group of potential crazies in how to disable Subaru locking systems and finding the most efficacious spots to place explosives in Imprezas and Outbacks. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/122 "2016-09-30T13:03:40Z")
They’re called “wrongful death” lawsuits and are a branch of tort law. The common law has generally recognized that if a person causes the death of another person, and the deceased has a family, the wrongful death harms not just the deceased, but also the surviving spouse and children. The surviving spouse can sue for loss of consortium (i.e. fancy law term for the close spousal bond with the deceased), while the children can sue for the loss of guidance and support that deceased parents normally provide to their children. Depending on the law of the jurisdiction, spouses and children may also be able to sue for the pecuniary loss of the deceased’s income. Curiously, the common law in England didn’t recognize any claim by the deceased for the harm caused by the death. In the Commonwealth countries, that gap has often been plugged by statute, so the estate of the deceased can also bring an action. The proceeds of any such action would be distributed according to the deceased’s will. I assume the US states have passed similar laws, but don’t have any personal knowledge of that. This looks like a good summary of the law: “Who can bring a wrongful death lawsuit?” > **[Who Can Bring a Wrongful Death Lawsuit? | FreeAdvice](https://www.freeadvice.com/legal/who-can-bring-a-wrongful-death-lawsuit/)** > > State laws vary on who may bring wrongful death lawsuits. In all states, close family members like spouses, children and parents can bring wrongful death cases. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/123 "2016-09-30T13:05:20Z")
In answer to your hypothetical, **silenus** , you wouldn’t have any action for the death of your neighbour. His wife and children may have, depending on the law where he lives. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/124 "2016-09-30T13:17:28Z")
Seems to me that in order to do something like what Congress wants to do you need a pretty complex system to do it right. You probably need an international treaty as well. In theory, I don’t see a problem with pursuing claims against other governments for unlawful actions. And I have no problem with that applying to the US, just so long as we have a consistent legal standard. Belligerent actions would not be covered, but things like what Saudi Arabia is accused of, an armed attack on a friendly state through covert action, is really the kind of thing they should have to pay for, and us too if our covert actions kill people in friendly nations. If it’s against an enemy nation, then that’s just an act of war. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/125 "2016-09-30T13:18:24Z")
Oh, and **Bricker** has filled in the last point: the allegation is that the Saudi government contributed to the attacks. If proven, that could show that the government was one of the tort feasors and therefore also liable. Tort liability can extend beyond the person who actually killed the deceased and include others who contributed to the death, even is those others did not actually do the killing. And if those others were acting on behalf of a government, that government could potentially also be liable. Lots of “ifs” “ands” and “maybes” before any foreign government could be held liable. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/126 "2016-09-30T13:20:32Z")
There are two separate allegations: one is that the Saudi government is directly responsible in some way. The other is that the Saudi government is vicariously liable for the acts of its citizens, under various (dubious) theories. > [@](#): > > In theory, I don’t see a problem with pursuing claims against other governments for unlawful actions. And I have no problem with that applying to the US, just so long as we have a consistent legal standard. Belligerent actions would not be covered, but things like what Saudi Arabia is accused of, an armed attack on a friendly state through covert action, is really the kind of thing they should have to pay for, and us too if our covert actions kill people in friendly nations. If it’s against an enemy nation, then that’s just an act of war. What’s the difference? It’s not any more legal _under US law_ for a foreign government to blow up people and buildings using tanks in a declared war than it is for a foreign government to train hijackers. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/127 "2016-09-30T13:26:22Z")
Because for acts of war we already have a remedy. It’s called war. We need something different for supposedly friendly nations with government elements who pursue their own agendas and kill our citizens. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/128 "2016-09-30T13:38:55Z")
[ABC News](http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/mcconnell-congress-discuss-fixes-911-law-42450608?yptr=yahoo) > [@](#): > > House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell both said the measure, the only law enacted over Obama’s veto in his eight years as president, needed repairs. McConnell said the law may have “unintended ramifications,” while Ryan said “there may be some work to be done” to make sure it doesn’t lead to U.S. service members overseas being sued. > > “Everybody was aware of who the potential beneficiaries were but **nobody really had focused on the downside in terms of our international relationships,** ” McConnell told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference. You had ONE job… ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/129 "2016-09-30T13:39:10Z")
**adaher** , we have traditionally used war as a remedy for that, too. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/130 "2016-09-30T14:00:20Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Oh, and **Bricker** has filled in the last point: the allegation is that the Saudi government contributed to the attacks. If proven, that could show that the government was one of the tort feasors and therefore also liable. Can’t say I know what a “tort feasor” is, but it sure sounds like something the Saudi government would be! ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/131 "2016-09-30T14:08:50Z")
Question asked and answered well. Thank you! ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/132 "2016-09-30T14:51:07Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > The Nicaragua case I cited earlier does not support that conclusion. The US simply ignored the decision of the ICJ and never paid the reparations ordered by the Court. > > What makes you think the US government would pay a judgment ordered against it by a foreign court? The expectation that the foreign government would pay a judgement ordered against it by a US court. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/133 "2016-09-30T15:10:47Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Because for acts of war we already have a remedy. It’s called war. We need something different for supposedly friendly nations with government elements who pursue their own agendas and kill our citizens. There’s no difference. A country which sends a small commando group into another country to attack, kill people, and destroy property is committing an act of war, even if it’s not a formal military action. Whether the country is thought to be “friendly” is irrelevant to whether its an act of war. Stalin thought Germany was “friendly”, even as Operation Barbarossa was underway. The “friendly” bit only relates to whether the country that was attacked wants to treat it as an act of war and respond in kind, or seek some other remedies. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/134 "2016-09-30T15:16:09Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > The expectation that the foreign government would pay a judgement ordered against it by a US court. Yes, that’s the main issue raised by this thread. However, in that post I was responding to the suggestion made by some posters that if other countries start allowing actions in their courts against the US, the US would accept that it no longer has sovereign immunity and would duly pay. I have doubts on that, as demonstrated by an actual case where an international court ordered the US to pay reparations. The US simply ignored that court order, and it has also ignored orders against it from the courts of Iran and Cuba. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/135 "2016-09-30T15:21:26Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Yes, that’s the main issue raised by this thread. > > However, in that post I was responding to the suggestion made by some posters that if other countries start allowing actions in their courts against the US, the US would accept that it no longer has sovereign immunity and would duly pay. > > I have doubts on that, as demonstrated by an actual case where an international court ordered the US to pay reparations. The US simply ignored that court order, and it has also ignored orders against it from the courts of Iran and Cuba. Yes, but all of those were while we honored an agreement that our courts couldn’t find against another government. It was not inconsistent to not honor a finding by a foreign court against our government. We have changed that precedent. Not saying that we will pay, just that we would be hypocritical not to. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/136 "2016-09-30T15:33:55Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Can’t say I know what a “tort feasor” is, but it sure sounds like something the Saudi government would be! It’s just a fancy way of saying “someone who committed a tort.” Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/137 "2016-09-30T15:49:45Z")
Or, someone who specialises in making really fancy German cakes. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/138 "2016-09-30T16:13:10Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > There’s no difference. A country which sends a small commando group into another country to attack, kill people, and destroy property is committing an act of war, even if it’s not a formal military action. > > Whether the country is thought to be “friendly” is irrelevant to whether its an act of war. Stalin thought Germany was “friendly”, even as Operation Barbarossa was underway. > > The “friendly” bit only relates to whether the country that was attacked wants to treat it as an act of war and respond in kind, or seek some other remedies. Was the assassination of Bin Laden an act of war then? Sounds like something that kook Ron Paul would say. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/139 "2016-09-30T16:21:10Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > According to this article: > > [More on Sovereign Immunity and the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act | Lawfare](https://www.lawfareblog.com/more-sovereign-immunity-and-justice-against-sponsors-terrorism-act) > > both Cuba and Iran have already lifted US sovereign immunity in their courts, and Cubans and Iranians have sued the US in the Cuban and Iranian courts. The US ignored the actions, leading to default judgments against the US which the Cuban and Iranian governments have tried to enforce against the US, without success. The USA doesnt have diplomatic relations with those nations, as i said before. And, up until now, we have gone on the system that none sovereign nation may sue another. Until Congress passed this law, we could say "It is customary international law that one foreign state is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another foreign state. " We cant say that anymore. On what basis would the USA _now_ refuse to pay a judgement against it (by a nation we recognize)? “We have a bigger army, so get stuffed?”:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2016, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714/140 "2016-09-30T16:24:10Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Yes, that’s the main issue raised by this thread. > > However, in that post I was responding to the suggestion made by some posters that if other countries start allowing actions in their courts against the US, the US would accept that it no longer has sovereign immunity and would duly pay. > > I have doubts on that, as demonstrated by an actual case where an international court ordered the US to pay reparations. The US simply ignored that court order, and it has also ignored orders against it from the courts of Iran and Cuba. \*Yes, but that was before Congress passed this new law, now wasnt it? \*Nor did we recognize those nations. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-congress-override-obamas-veto-on-saudi-waiver/766714.md?page=8)