9/11 families can sue Saudi Arabia, Senate says. Why such suits could backfire
The Senate passed legislation Tuesday to allow聽any of the聽nearly 3,000聽families of the Sept. 11 victims 聽for any role it might have聽had in the attacks.听聽
New York Sen. Charles Schumer (D), one of the聽legislation's聽sponsors, said it聽would聽聽to the聽victims聽and their聽families and聽hold Saudi Arabia聽"accountable."
But the Obama administration, the Saudi government, and others聽are of聽a different opinion: The legislation could expose the United States to an international relations nightmare.听
"[T]he聽potential exposure such a measure would bring to the U.S. is inestimable," wrote the Los Angeles Times in an editorial that聽.听
Expect to see civil claims by victims of collateral damage in [US] military attacks, lawsuits by people caught up in the nation's post-9/11 detention policies, including Guantanamo Bay, and challenges over atrocities committed by U.S.-backed Syrian rebels.听Pretty much anywhere that U.S. policies have led to damages, those who suffered could potentially seek redress in their own courts, jeopardizing American assets overseas, where the rule of law sometimes is solid, but in other cases is a tool wielded for political purposes."聽
The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act聽聽to bring a聽lawsuit against聽any聽foreign government聽tied聽to terror聽attacks on US聽soil. The聽legislation, however, is聽meant聽to聽allow the聽families of聽victims of 9/11聽to sue Saudi Arabia, since some lawmakers聽allege聽it聽supported some of the 19聽terrorists.听聽
In addition to urging the Obama administration聽to declassify 28 pages of聽an聽838-page congressional聽report聽about the attacks, thousands of family members聽brought a聽class-action lawsuit聽against Saudi Arabia, albeit聽unsuccessfully.听A federal judge dismissed Riyadh聽from the聽lawsuit, saying the plaintiffs聽聽the government was involved. And the US Supreme聽Court聽later聽declined to take up聽a case that examined if聽the lower聽courts should have dismissed the lawsuit聽altogether.听聽
The聽legislation聽on the table聽aims to amend聽the 1976 Foreign Services Immunities Act聽that, for the most part,聽shields聽any foreign government from聽being sued by American聽citizens.听In fact,聽Saudi聽Arabia聽invoked聽it聽in the case that the federal judge dismissed.听
But there have been聽exceptions聽involving terrorism,聽notably聽against聽Chile聽and聽Taiwan, both of which involved聽,聽according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.听
The families of Americans killed in terror attacks in Israel from 2002 to 2004 won a lawsuit 聽for their involvement. The Palestinian聽Authority and PLO聽have聽appealed the聽decision, arguing聽the attacks were聽directed at Israelis, not聽Americans.
The argument of聽Saudi Foreign Minister Adel bin Ahmed Al-Jubeir聽is聽different, falling聽in line more with the Obama administration and Los Angeles Times editorial board.听聽聽
"What聽[Congress is] ... doing is stripping the principle of sovereign immunities which would turn the world for international law into the law of the jungle,"聽said Mr.听Al-Jubeir in a聽.听"That's why the [Obama] administration is opposed to it, and that's why every country in the world is opposed to it."聽
White House Press Secretary Joshua Earnest said the Obama administration's聽opposition to聽the legislation is聽.听聽
"It could put the United States and our taxpayers and our聽service members聽and our diplomats at significant risk if countries were 鈥� other countries were to adopt a similar law," he said in a press briefing April 18, adding any "concerns" against Saudi Arabia should be addressed through diplomacy.听聽
Mr. Earnest does not expect聽the president to sign the legislation, and the House has not acted on it, according to the Associated Press.听聽
Steve聽Vladeck, a professor at American聽University's聽Washington College of Law that specializes in聽counterterrorism, tells 海角大神聽that聽one late聽amendment to the bill could minimize its聽effectiveness. The amendment would give the government the ability to put any lawsuit on hold, especially for national security or diplomacy reasons, he says.听聽
"One of the really interesting questions now that will come out in the House is: Will that provision have the effect of watering down the bill to the point of聽toothlessness?" asks Professor Vladeck. "In some sense it's聽the government聽saying, 'Don't worry. It's not going to be so bad.' "聽
