Analysis: Congress overrides presidential veto in historical vote
Gracie Fletcher, Staff Writer
9/11 victims’ families seek justice. Graphics Credit: Emily Artus.
The determination behind justice being brought to the families of victims of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 was the key motivation that drove the recent historicCongressional override of a presidential veto.
President Barack Obama had recently vetoed the 9/11 bill that held the power of victims’ families ability to sue the Saudi Arabian government in affiliation with the terrorist attacks. The President was in disagreement, his opinion leaning towards the fact that the bill would pose a national security threat on officials in the United States. This fear included the idea that identical lawsuits from abroad would arise.
Both the House and Senate voted to override the bill without hesitation. The House approved the override with a vote of 348-77 while the Senate’s vote was 97-1. Once the vote was completed, the House floor erupted with applause.
The chase after justice for the impacted families surpassed Obama’s veto which angered White House press secretary Josh Earnest. Earnest proclaimed the vote was “the single most embarrassing thing the United Sates Senate has done possibly since 1983,” referring to President Reagan’s veto of an Oregon land transfer bill.
David Tyner, NGU’s chair of the Political Science and Criminal Justice and Legal Studies Department, was in agreement with Congress’ decision to override the President’s veto.
“I think that if I were in the Congress, I probably would have voted in favor of the law, but I would want to hear the debate on both sides,” Tyner said.
Tyner understood the effects of life during the aftermath of 9/11 and the desire for justice of the families who have suffered the loss of loved ones from the attacks. “On one hand, I sympathize with the families of 9/11 and I certainly sympathize with and agree with their desire to bring perpetrators to justice or the people who supported and funded the perpetrators,” Tyner said.
If Tyner was a member of Congress, he said he would have agreed with the majority vote within the respect of the President’s opinion. “I understand the argument made by the President and others that Saudi Arabia is an important ally and that this law could damage our relationships with our allies,” Tyner said.
“It’s not an easy call. This was a milestone, too since this was the first veto the President has had overridden,” Tyner said.
