.Lmao, dumfuk reps.http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar..._to_changing_jasta_after_override_131930.html
Top Republicans Open to Changing JASTA After Override
The top two Republicans in Congress said they are open to altering legislation that allows lawsuits against foreign governments that sponsor terrorism — a stance expressed less than 24 hours after lawmakers voted to override President Obama’s veto of the measure.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday there might be “unintended ramifications” from the legislation, and he and Speaker Paul Ryan both suggested an openness to re-examining or altering the legislation in the post-election congressional period.
Obama criticized Congress for overriding his veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, the first time during his presidency that lawmakers have successfully taken such action. He argued that beyond complex foreign policy implications, the law could expose American citizens to retaliation abroad.
Ryan said Thursday he shares those concerns, but Congress undid the veto anyway to give 9/11 victims the opportunity to sue Saudi Arabia over allegations its government was involved in the terror attacks. The speaker said he is open to finding changes later this year to assuage concerns about retaliation.
“We want to make sure that the 9/11 victims and their families have their day in court,” Ryan said. “At the same time, I would like to think there may be some work to be done to protect our service members overseas from any kind of … legal ensnarements that could occur, any kind of retribution.
“I'd like to think that there's a way we could fix [the law] so that our service members do not have legal problems overseas, while still protecting the rights of the 9/11 victims.”
McConnell agreed that it could be “worth further discussing” changes to the legislation, but he laid the blame on Obama and the White House for not engaging lawmakers sooner on the long-term ramifications: “I told the president the other day that this was an example of an issue we should have talked about much earlier.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar..._to_changing_jasta_after_override_131930.html
Top Republicans Open to Changing JASTA After Override
The top two Republicans in Congress said they are open to altering legislation that allows lawsuits against foreign governments that sponsor terrorism — a stance expressed less than 24 hours after lawmakers voted to override President Obama’s veto of the measure.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday there might be “unintended ramifications” from the legislation, and he and Speaker Paul Ryan both suggested an openness to re-examining or altering the legislation in the post-election congressional period.
Obama criticized Congress for overriding his veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, the first time during his presidency that lawmakers have successfully taken such action. He argued that beyond complex foreign policy implications, the law could expose American citizens to retaliation abroad.
Ryan said Thursday he shares those concerns, but Congress undid the veto anyway to give 9/11 victims the opportunity to sue Saudi Arabia over allegations its government was involved in the terror attacks. The speaker said he is open to finding changes later this year to assuage concerns about retaliation.
“We want to make sure that the 9/11 victims and their families have their day in court,” Ryan said. “At the same time, I would like to think there may be some work to be done to protect our service members overseas from any kind of … legal ensnarements that could occur, any kind of retribution.
“I'd like to think that there's a way we could fix [the law] so that our service members do not have legal problems overseas, while still protecting the rights of the 9/11 victims.”
McConnell agreed that it could be “worth further discussing” changes to the legislation, but he laid the blame on Obama and the White House for not engaging lawmakers sooner on the long-term ramifications: “I told the president the other day that this was an example of an issue we should have talked about much earlier.”