The Senate voted on Wednesday to override President Obama’s veto of legislation allowing lawsuits against foreign sponsors of terrorism.

The House is expected to follow suit within hours, making this the first veto of Obama’s presidency to be overturned by Congress.

Last week Obama vetoed the bill explaining that the “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” (JASTA) would erode the doctrine of sovereign immunity and expose the US to lawsuits around the world.

The bill would have allowed the families of 9/11 victims to sue the Saudi Arabian government over its alleged support for the terrorists who carried out the attacks.

JASTA, which passed unanimously in both the House and the Senate, allows US judges to waive sovereign immunity claims when dealing with acts of terrorism committed on American soil – potentially allowing lawsuits against Saudi Arabia over the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Fifteen of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi nationals.

The issue appears to cross party lines, with Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York) pushing for a veto override while Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker (R-Tennessee) is concerned it would “end up exporting [US] foreign policy to trial lawyers.”

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter has argued that allowing JASTA to become law could lead to US being sued in foreign courts and subjected to an “intrusive discovery process.”

This could put Washington in the “difficult position of choosing between disclosing classified or otherwise sensitive information or suffering adverse rulings and potentially large damage awards for our refusal to do so,” Carter wrote to House Armed Services Committee chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) earlier this week, according to the Military Times.

The House is expected hold a veto override vote later on Wednesday. </s> In a landmark 97-1 vote, the United States Senate voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to override Barack Obama’s veto of a bill allowing 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia.

Only Obama’s ally Nevada Democrat Harry Reid voted against the bill.

This is a severe blow to Obama, who lobbied hard against the bill, known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. This is a first rebuke to Obama in his eight years of presidency.

Obama vetoed the legislation on Friday because he said the bill would infringe on the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy. It was the 12th veto of his presidency and, until now, none have been overridden even after Republicans’ longstanding control of the Congress.

The White House argued the 9/11 bill would undermine the principle of sovereign immunity and open up the United States itself to lawsuits.

In a letter to Republican and Democratic Senate leaders, Obama had said: ‘I strongly believe that enacting JASTA into law would be detrimental to US national interests.’

Obama warned of ‘devastating’ consequences for the Pentagon, service members, diplomats and the intelligence services.

It would ‘neither protect Americans from terrorist attacks, nor improve the effectiveness of our response to such attacks’, he warned.

Families of 9/11 victims have campaigned for the law -- convinced that the Saudi government had a hand in the attacks that killed almost 3,000 people.

Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens, but no link to the government has been proven. The Saudi government denies any links to the plotters.

Declassified documents showed US intelligence had multiple suspicions about links between the Saudi government and the attackers. </s> WASHINGTON — Congress is poised to override President Barack Obama’s veto of a bill that would allow families of Sept. 11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia for the kingdom’s alleged backing of the terrorists who carried out the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people.

The showdown is scheduled for Wednesday. Proponents of the legislation say they have enough votes for what would be a first: During his nearly two full terms in office, Obama has vetoed nine bills. None has been overridden.

While there is broad and bipartisan support for bucking the president, the bill’s opponents also are pushing hard to keep the measure from being enacted. They’re warning the U.S. will become vulnerable to retaliatory litigation in foreign courts that could put American troops in legal jeopardy.

Here’s a look at the key issues surrounding the bill, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act:

WHAT WOULD THE LEGISLATION DO?

The legislation, known as JASTA, gives victims’ families the right to sue in U.S. court for any role that elements of the Saudi government may have played in the 2001 attacks that killed thousands in New York, the Washington, D.C., area and Pennsylvania. Under the terms of the bill, courts would be permitted to waive a claim of foreign sovereign immunity when an act of terrorism occurs inside U.S. borders. Saudi Arabia has objected vehemently to the bill.

WHY DID OBAMA VETO THE BILL?

In his veto message issued on Friday, Obama said the bill would disrupt longstanding international principles on sovereign immunity and could create complications with even the closest allies of the United States.

Foreign governments would be able to act “reciprocally” and allow their courts to exercise jurisdiction over the United States and its employees for allegedly causing injuries overseas through American support to third parties, according to Obama. As examples, Obama cited actions taken overseas by U.S.-backed armed militias, the improper use of U.S. military equipment, and abuses committed by U.S.-trained police units.

The bill’s proponents have disputed Obama’s rationale as “unconvincing and unsupportable,” saying the measure is narrowly tailored and applies only to acts of terrorism that occur on U.S. soil.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Monday that the Senate would vote Wednesday on the president’s veto.

WHAT’S THE CONCERN FOR AMERICAN TROOPS AND SECRETS?

Rep. Mac Thornberry, the Texas Republican who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, said that even if none of the potential lawsuits against the United States succeeded, “the risks of discovery or trial in foreign courts, including the questioning of government employees under oath, will disclose sensitive information and subject Americans to legal jeopardy of various kinds.”

Thornberry is opposed to the bill and is urging his colleagues not to override Obama’s veto.

But attorneys for the 9/11 families said U.S. military personnel are not at risk of lawsuits. Should a foreign government enact a law that allows a claim against American service members, that nation would not be reciprocating but engaging in a “transparent and unjustifiable act of aggression” that the U.S. should respond to, they said.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said Monday he is inclined to vote to override and said it looks as though there are enough votes in the House to overturn the president’s decision. The House would act after the Senate votes.

IS THERE HEIGHTENED TENSION WITH A KEY MIDDLE EAST ALLY?

An override of Obama’s veto is stoking apprehension about undermining a longstanding yet strained relationship with Saudi Arabia, a critical U.S. ally in the Middle East. Saudi Foreign Minister Adel bin Ahmed Al-Jubeir had previously warned lawmakers they were on a path to turning “the world for international law into the law of the jungle.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., last week advised his congressional colleagues against alienating Saudi Arabia at a time when the U.S. needs the kingdom’s support to defeat Islamic State militants. “If you want to lose Saudi Arabia as an ally, be careful what you wish for,” said Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “They’re the heart and soul of the Islamic world.”

HOW MANY VOTES ARE NEEDED TO OVERRIDE A VETO?

A two-thirds majority of lawmakers present and voting is required in the House and Senate to override a veto. </s> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation on Friday that would allow the families of victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia's government for damages, despite the White House's threat to veto the measure.

The U.S. Senate in May unanimously passed the "Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act," known as JASTA. The bill's passage in the House by voice vote, two days before the 15th anniversary of the attacks that killed about 3,000 people, was greeted with cheers and applause in the chamber.

"We can no longer allow those who injure and kill Americans to hide behind legal loopholes, denying justice to the victims of terrorism," said Republican Representative Bob Goodlatte, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Fifteen of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers who crashed airliners in New York, outside Washington and in Pennsylvania were Saudi nationals. The Saudi government, which strongly denies responsibility, has lobbied against the bill.

Opponents of the measure said it could strain relations with Saudi Arabia and lead to retaliatory laws that would allow foreign nationals to sue Americans for alleged involvement in terrorist attacks.

The White House on Friday reiterated that President Barack Obama would veto the bill. [nW1N12802E]

If Obama carries out that threat and the required two-thirds of both the Republican-majority House and Senate still support the bill, it would be the first time since Obama's presidency began in 2009 that Congress had overridden a veto.

The House passed the measure by voice vote, without objections or recorded individual votes. That could make it easier for Obama's fellow Democrats to uphold his veto later without officially changing their positions.

JASTA would remove sovereign immunity, preventing lawsuits against governments, for countries found to be involved in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. It also would allow survivors, and relatives of those killed in them to seek damages from other countries.

In this case, it would allow suits to proceed in federal court in New York as lawyers try to prove that the Saudis were involved in the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Backers say passage is long overdue. They argue that if Saudi Arabia, or any other government, is innocent of involvement in attacks, they have nothing to fear from the legislation.

A member of the French parliament, Pierre Lellouche, said he would consider such legislation in France, and would anticipate it elsewhere, if the final version of JASTA does not include waivers for countries that are U.S. allies and actively involved in fighting terrorism.

"It may trigger similar acts all over the place, and then you enter into a 'state of jungle' where everybody sues everybody," Lellouche, who runs a parliamentary committee on international law, told reporters on a conference call on Friday. </s> WASHINGTON - The Senate on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to override President Barack Obama’s veto of a bill to allow survivors and families of 9/11 victims to pursue their lawsuit in a U.S. court against Saudi Arabia for alleged complicity in the terrorist attacks.

The veto override — the first for Obama — won 97-1 in a vote that began at around noon, with only Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in opposition despite lobbying against it by the Obama administration, some foreign relations experts and Saudi Arabia.

The House was expected also to vote Wednesday on an override, according to Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), the House sponsor of the measure.

“Democrat and Republicans don’t agree on much these days. But we agree on JASTA,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in a floor speech that led up to the vote. “Both parties believe that the families of the 911 victims should be able to seek justice.”

Several lawmakers voted for the override despite concerns, and said they would introduce additional legislation if the White House concerns about JASTA come true.

Sen Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s top Democrat, said in a floor speech that he’ll closely watch what happens next, especially other countries’ reactions, and would address any risks to U.S. diplomats, troops and assets in additional legislation.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), Foreign Relations Committee chairman, said he would vote to override the veto despite concerns about the legislation because of his sympathy for the families of 9/11 victims who had battled for the right to sue Saudi Arabia for so long. </s> WASHINGTON - Congress on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to override President Barack Obama’s veto of a bill to allow survivors and families of 9/11 victims to pursue their lawsuit in a U.S. court against Saudi Arabia for alleged complicity in the terrorist attacks.

The veto override — the first for Obama — won 97-1 in the Senate and 348-77 with one present in the House despite second-thoughts by some lawmakers and intense lobbying against the legislation by the Obama administration, some foreign relations experts and Saudi Arabia.

Family members who fought for the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, or JASTA, applauded and cheered after the House voted, making possible the prospects they’ll see their trillion dollar lawsuit reinstated eight years after an appellate court in New York sidelined it.

Most Democrats chose to support the 9/11 families’ quest to sue Saudi Arabia than back their president, though more in the House than the Senate stood by him, as the vote in both chambers easily passed the threshold of two-thirds of the members.

Before the vote, Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), the House sponsor, urged a veto override.

“It’s really essential that the House today stand on the side of justice,” King said.

Earlier, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), the Senate sponsor, did the same. “Democrat and Republicans don’t agree on much these days,” he said. “But we agree on JASTA. Both parties believe that the families of the 9/11 victims should be able to seek justice.”

Despite the lopsided vote, several senators expressed concerns and said they would vote the override only reluctantly because of their sympathy for the 9/11 families, and House members engaged in a debate, with some urging that the veto be sustained.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) broke with Schumer as the lone Senate vote to sustain the veto. Reid’s office later distributed a letter from Obama to him explaining why he vetoed the bill on Friday after both chambers passed it without opposition earlier this month.

The White House listed its objections: it turns over national security and foreign policy to the courts; puts U.S. military, diplomats and assets at risk of retaliatory lawsuits by other countries; and threatens important and sensitive relationships with other nations.

Key members from both parties in the Senate and the House said they would continue to consider legislation to further narrow JASTA and to mitigate any blowback from other countries.

Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, urged a vote to sustain the veto during the House debate.

“My concern for this legislation is more related to the unintended consequences it may have,” he said, echoing the Obama administration’s caution that the bill weakens the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which protects a country and its official representatives abroad.

Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) agreed, saying that “this is not the way to go about getting justice.”

What if Iraq citizens sued the United States for the 2003 bombings of Baghdad that killed and maimed so many people and won compensation for each one of them, he asked.

He said the bill is narrowly drawn and won’t put U.S. military and diplomats at risk. “We must hold justice for the 9/11 families to imagined fears,” he said. </s> House to vote on Sept. 11 legislation as veto threat looms

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House is slated to vote on a bipartisan bill that would allow families of Sept. 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia, setting the stage for a showdown with President Barack Obama on the eve of the 15th anniversary of the attacks.

The Senate passed the bill in May by voice vote despite the strident objections from Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals.

The White House has signaled Obama would veto the legislation over concerns about exposing Americans overseas to legal risks. If the door is opened for U.S. citizens to take the Saudis to court, then a foreign country could in turn sue the United States, the Obama administration has cautioned. Votes from two-thirds of the members in the House and Senate would be needed to override a veto.

FILE - This June 16, 2016, file photo, shows an exterior view of the Capitol Building in Washington. The House is slated to vote Sept. 9 on a bipartisan bill that would allow families of Sept. 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia, setting the stage for a showdown with President Barack Obama on the eve of the 15th anniversary of the attacks. The Senate passed the bill in May by voice vote despite the strident objections from Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals.(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

"We wanted it to come to the floor, symbolically before the 15th anniversary," said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., the bill's sponsor in the House. "We've been aiming toward that the entire session."

The bill set for a House vote Friday gives victims' families the right to sue in U.S. court for any role that elements of the Saudi government may have played in the 2001 attacks that killed thousands in New York, the Washington, D.C., area and Pennsylvania.

Terry Strada, national chair for 9/11 Families United For Justice Against Terrorism, disagreed that the bill could backfire as the White House has warned.

"If we're not funding terrorist organizations and killing people, then we don't have anything to worry about," she said.

The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act had triggered a threat from Riyadh to pull billions of dollars from the U.S. economy if the legislation is enacted. But Saudi Foreign Minister Adel bin Ahmed Al-Jubeir denied in May that the kingdom made any threats over the bill. He said Riyadh had warned that investor confidence in the U.S. would shrink if the bill became law.

"In fact what they (Congress) are doing is stripping the principle of sovereign immunities, which would turn the world for international law into the law of the jungle," Al-Jubeir said.

The House vote will come two months after Congress released 28 declassified pages from a congressional report into 9/11 that reignited speculation over links at least a few of the attackers had to Saudis, including government officials. The allegations were never substantiated by later U.S. investigations into the terrorist attacks.

Brian McGlinchey, director of advocacy website 28pages.org, said making the documents public "strengthened the resolve of 9/11 families and other advocates of justice to bring about the enactment" of the bill.

A decision by Obama to veto legislation "that would give 9/11 families their well-deserved day in court would truly stain his legacy," McGlinchey said.

In a separate development, a bipartisan group of senators announced Thursday that they've introduced a joint resolution of disapproval to block the Obama administration's proposed sale of more than $1 billion worth of U.S. weapons to Saudi Arabia.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., cited Saudi Arabia's poor human rights record and the kingdom's role in Yemen's civil war.

The war is pitting Yemen's internationally recognized government and a Saudi-led coalition against the Shiite rebels known as Houthis, who are allied with army units loyal to a former president. The Saudi-led coalition has been carrying out airstrikes in Yemen since March 2015.

"Selling $1.15 billion in tanks, guns, ammunition, and more to a country with a poor human rights record embroiled in a bitter war is a recipe for disaster and an escalation of an ongoing arms race in the region," Paul said. </s> Congress Overrides Obama's Veto On Sept. 11 Lawsuit Bill

Enlarge this image toggle caption Drew Angerer/Getty Images Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Updated at 3:22 p.m. ET with House vote

Congress approved the first successful override of a presidential veto from President Obama on Wednesday when the House joined the Senate in voting against Obama's objection to a bill that would allow family members to sue Saudi Arabia over the Sept. 11 attacks.

Politics House Approves Bill Allowing 9/11 Victims To Sue Saudi Arabia House Approves Bill Allowing 9/11 Victims To Sue Saudi Arabia Listen · 2:02 2:02

The override cleared the Senate earlier Wednesday, in a 97-1 vote in favor of the override, well above the two-thirds majority needed to overcome the president's objection. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid cast the lone "no" vote. Sens. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., did not vote.

Politics Saudis Threaten Economic Repercussions If Congress Passes 9/11 Bill Saudis Threaten Economic Repercussions If Congress Passes 9/11 Bill Listen · 4:01 4:01

The House vote was 348-77.

The Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) would, among other things, give families of Sept. 11 victims the right to sue Saudi Arabia over claims it aided or financed the terrorist attacks.

The House initially passed the measure on a voice vote earlier this month, two days before the 15th anniversary of the deadly terrorist attacks.

The Saudi government denies any role in those attacks, and the 9/11 Commission found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials were involved. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, though, and there have long been suspicions that some of the hijackers received support during their time in the U.S. from individuals with possible connections to the Saudi Kingdom.

Supporters of the veto override say those suspicions should be explored in a U.S. court of law.

The Obama administration says it's sympathetic to victims' families, but concerned that allowing such lawsuits would open the door to legal challenges against American officials in other countries.

"The president understands the passion that's on both sides of this issue," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Tuesday. "It's the president's responsibility to consider the broader impact that this bill, as it's currently written, would have on our national security, and our standing around the world, and on our diplomats and our service members who represent the United States around the world."

Those concerns were underscored by CIA Director John Brennan shortly before the Senate vote.

National Security Congress Releases Long-Classified 29 Pages Of 9/11 Report Congress Releases Long-Classified 29 Pages Of 9/11 Report Listen · 3:03 3:03

"The principle of sovereign immunity protects U.S. officials every day, and is rooted in reciprocity," Brennan said in a statement. "If we fail to uphold this standard for other countries, we place our own nation's officials in danger. No country has more to lose from undermining that principle than the United States—and few institutions would be at greater risk than CIA."

Under the principle of "sovereign immunity," a country should remain immune from lawsuits in the courts of another country. Although there are some very limited exceptions to that principle already, critics complain the measure allowing lawsuits against the Saudi government creates a dangerously wide exception.

Families of Sept. 11 victims have demanded a right to seek monetary compensation from Saudi Arabia since the attacks, and versions of this bill have been floating around the Capitol since as far back as 2009, but the legislation never reached the floor until this year.

It sailed through both chambers without any opposition, but did so without a formal tally of votes. Passage of JASTA was done by so-called "unanimous consent" in the Senate, and by voice vote in the House.

What does this bill do?

JASTA would allow a lawsuit against any country by any U.S. citizen who claims the country financed or otherwise aided and abetted a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Liability would attach only if the plaintiff could show the country acted with knowledge in providing this support.

Congress already has allowed Americans to sue countries that have been designated as "state sponsors of terrorism," but currently, that list includes only three countries — Iran, Syria and Sudan. The White House says that designation is assigned only after very careful review by national security, intelligence and foreign policy officials, and that such designations should not be left to private litigants and judges.

The concerns voiced by the White House, some lawmakers

There's been talk about the principle of "sovereign immunity" and how this bill might erode that principle.

Under the principle of "sovereign immunity," a country should remain immune from lawsuits in the courts of another country. It's a long-held principle of international law. And although there are some very limited exceptions to that principle, some lawmakers and the White House believe JASTA creates a dangerously wide exception.

The fear is that other countries might reciprocate and enact laws that would drag U.S. government officials or members of our military into lawsuits in foreign courts under the theory that those people aided and abetted some injury abroad.

And to Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, that would expose the U.S. to tremendous liability.

"Let's face it. We're the greatest nation on earth. We have more involvements around the world than any country," said Corker. "We've got assets deployed all around the world more than any country. So if sovereign immunity recedes, we're the nation that is most exposed."

In his veto message, President Obama said there could be lawsuits against the United States for "actions taken by members of an armed group that received U.S. assistance, misuse of U.S. military equipment by foreign forces, or abuses committed by police units that received U.S. training." However without merit these claims may be, the White House argues, they would still suck up resources and increase the country's legal exposure.

Allowing Sept. 11 families a day in court

Supporters of the bill say it's a little alarmist to think this bill is going to corrode the principle of sovereign immunity and invite a flood of retaliatory litigation against the U.S. They point out sovereign immunity is not absolute — there are already, after all, exceptions to it.

And most importantly, they argue, all JASTA ultimately does is give Sept. 11 victims a chance to be heard in court.

"The issue is fundamentally about, is whether someone would have the opportunity to raise their concerns in the judicial system. It's not a judgment about how a case would come out," said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., a senior member of the Intelligence Committee. "It seems to me that it is appropriate — particularly in light of the families — that they should have a chance to raise their concerns in court. " </s> WASHINGTON — Congress on Wednesday overwhelmingly rejected President Barack Obama’s veto of legislation allowing relatives of the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, the first veto override of his eight-year presidency.

The House of Representatives voted 348-76 against the veto, just hours after the Senate rejected it 97-1, meaning the “Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” will become law.

The vote was a blow to Obama and to Saudi Arabia, one of the United States’ longest-standing allies in the Arab world.

Obama’s 11 previous vetoes were all sustained. But this time almost all of his strongest supporters in Congress opposed him in one of their last actions before leaving Washington to campaign for the Nov. 8 election.

“Overriding a presidential veto is something we don’t take lightly, but 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 diplomatic discomforts,” Senator Charles Schumer, the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate, said in a statement.

Schumer represents New York, the site of the World Trade Center and home to many of the nearly 3,000 people killed in the 2001 attacks, attack survivors and families of victims.

He led the fight for the legislation in the Senate, with Senator John Cornyn, the No. 2 Senate Republican. Kirsten Gillibrand, New York’s other senator and also a Democrat, cast the 67th “no” vote, the number needed to override the veto in the Senate.

Obama had argued that the bill, known as JASTA, could expose U.S. companies, troops and officials to lawsuits, and alienate important allies at a time of global unrest. He called Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and wrote a personal letter to him explaining that he strongly believed enacting JASTA into law would be detrimental to U.S. interests. Reid became the only senator to side with Obama.

“This is the single most embarrassing thing this United States Senate has done possibly since 1983,” spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters.

The Saudi government financed an extensive lobbying campaign against the legislation.

Major U.S. corporations including General Electric Co and Dow Chemical Co also opposed it, as did the European Union and other U.S. allies.

Secretary of Defense Ash Carter urged lawmakers to sustain the veto, and in an unusual move, CIA Director John Brennan issued a statement before Wednesday’s votes saying the bill had “grave implications” for national security.

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential running mate, and Bernie Sanders, an independent and former Democratic White House contender, did not vote.
The United States Senate and House of Representatives override the veto of President Barack Obama in regards to the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. The act narrows the scope of the legal doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity, specifically, in this instance against the sovereign nation of Saudi Arabia. The action is the first such congressional veto override to Obama.