It's been a whole week since the United States Congress, in all of its infinite wisdom, was able to override a Presidential veto and force the "Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act" (JASTA) into law. While we indeed support justice for victims of terrorism, this bill sets a terrible precedent for congressional interference in complicated foreign affairs, and it is probably only going to bring the victims of 9/11 an avalanche of legal fees and little to no justice. But now that the law has been passed, Congress already has some serious "rapid onset buyers remorse" concerning JASTA's potential repercussions. We've already begun to seen where this new legal avenue can lead. Saudi Arabia, the real target of the legislation, is now being sued by at least one victim of 9/11 terrorist attacks. Perhaps in response, Saudi has reportedly hired its 10th (yes, 10th) D.C. based lobbying firm and is spending approximately $1.3million a MONTH to do public relations and policy clean up. And we're hearing rumbles of other countries (cough, cough - Iraq) who have been the victim of our peculiar type of American terrorism already moving forward lawsuits against the U.S. government for its actions. In light of these less than preferred repercussions, a few brave leaders in Congress are advocating for changes to JASTA to prevent other countries from suing us, which would basically have to reverse the bill's alteration of the sovereign immunity law. Congress should remember this moment and take itself - and the constitutional separation of powers - a little more seriously. Congress should stop trying to score political points in election years around emotional anniversaries.

comments powered by Disqus