A bill was inflicted on Sept. 9, 2016 stating that families of 9/11 victims should be allowed to sue the Saudi Arabians for terrorist plots and attacks on 9/11. The bill was originally approved by the House in hopes of giving back to the families who lost loved ones that day, being that hundreds of people were killed by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
The extent and measure of how the bill is being carried out and to whom they give the right to sue is not clearly decided. Just days later from being proposed by Congress, it was vetoed by President Obama, an action that some agree with.
“I don’t think it’s good because they are sueing the Saudi Arabians, but it’s not the country’s fault, it’s a small group of people. Obama was right to veto it,” said Shane Siebenthall, senior.
The bill was reintroduced by Congress shortly after Obama’s veto and they voted by a majority to override his veto of the bill. This was the first override of Obama’s presidency. The tally of votes proved that Obama was overridden by a landslide; the Senate voted 97-1 and the House voted 348-77.
Even though the bill was passed, some still believe the bill is unjust and will cause commotion within our society.
“I believe it’s dangerous because it will have others sue the U.S for accusing us of doing similar things in other countries,” said Lleana Nautu, history teacher.
Overriding a presidential veto is not common in the White House. However, Congress thought it was necessary to impose this bill.
“It was important in this case that the families of the victims of 9/11 be allowed to pursue justice, even if that pursuit causes some dramatic comforts,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, co-author of the 9/11 bill (Washington Post).
Controversy worldwide over this bill has continued since it has been passed, and it remains an issue of dispute between Obama and the White House.