The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

The JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act) should be repealed.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
JuanNeoCena has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/30/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 weeks ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 100 times Debate No: 95777
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




I propose that this debate be organized in the following structure:

1) Introduction to Debate; each debater introduces him/herself and accepts either the position of pro/for or con/against.
2) Statement of Argument; each debater may produce an argument supporting their position.
3) Rebuttal and Conclusion; each debater may address/refute the points argued by their opponent and state their conclusion.

I am a first-year student in political science. I have limited experience in debate but enjoy familiarity with the topics involving this issue.

Acceptance of Position
I will be arguing the position of pro:
The JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act) should be repealed.


I accept this arguement.

Let's do this.
Debate Round No. 1


Summary of JASTA
The primary function of JASTA is to amend the federal judicial code to narrow the scope of foreign sovereign immunity. JASTA establishes federal court jurisdiction over civil claims regarding both acts of international terrorism and wrongful acts committed by foreign officials. (Citation #1) To summarize the intent of the legislation, JASTA is intended to allow private citizens of the United States sue Saudi Arabia for compensation for the latter’s complacency in the September 11th terrorist attacks.

Presentation of Argument
I assert that JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act) should be repealed. I support this assertion with two arguments:

1) JASTA is unenforceable.
JASTA assumes that the federal courts of the United States hold authority over independent nations. This premise is incorrect. International law recognizes the nation-state as sovereign; assuming Saudi Arabia does sponsor terrorist organizations, there is no mechanism to extort funds or punish the aforementioned. Given that JASTA is unenforceable, civil proceedings held within the United States are insubstantial. In addition to wasting national energies, this legislation misinforms victims of terrorism who could otherwise pursue legitimate action to rectify the situation.

2) JASTA does more harm than good.
JASTA sets dangerous precedent. As the hegemonic power, the United States facilitates invasions, drone-strikes, rebellions, and interventions to preserve national interests. Citizens of Japan, Iran, and Iraq all possess legitimate greviences against the United States. Should civil prosecution against states become commonplace, the United States demonstrates far more to lose than to gain. In simple terms, by enacting this legislation, the United States legitimizes the complaints and compensation of foreign citizens by the United States (and ultimately taxpayers).

Address to Opponent
I have purposefully presented two short arguments against JASTA. Both arguments are based primarily on international precedent and the institutions that currently exist. My primary goal during this round was to present my points concisely in a manor easy to understand. If necessary, I can substantiate these arguments further with additional evidence and explanation. I am excited to hear your position. I would like to thank you for engaging in this debate.

(Citation 1 - A Congressional Summary of the Legislation)
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Bobbelton 2 hours ago
It appears as though this debate has self-terminated. I am new to this platform and hope that the failure was not due to a mistake by myself. Wishing the best to my opponent and potential readers.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.