No, it's worse than nothing.
There is no Article III court in the land that has jurisdiction in this matter, and, if I were a judge, I would refuse delivery of the papers.
The House of Representatives has original jurisdiction and complete authority over the matter of a President failing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed and usurping legislative authority.
The fact is that Congress, as the surrogate for the People of the United States in our system, has completely surrendered its autonomy and authority in exchange for permanent incumbency, just like latter day Roman senators or members of the Reichstag.
No gesture of weakness and subservience could be worse than Boehner's "lawsuit", if it hasn't been dismissed already.
Do like the court did in Marbury v. Madison. Make noise like the plaintiff has a case, then declare the issue out of the scope of the court’s authority. The only entity the courts look out for is themselves.
Excellent points. My “better than nothing” comment is more reflective of desperation for some form of resistance and accountability that rigorous adherence to the Constitution.
The House is merely the prosecutor. It has the power to bring a case for removal of the president, but not to decide it.
Here we have a failed prosecutor (the House), and a judge/jury (the Senate) that has demonstrated inability to apply the law.
I agree with your conclusion. The House and Senate combined prefers their authority be usurped or granted to regulatory agencies. The prime directive is preservation of incumbency. Shoving the failure of the president to faithfully execute the laws onto a court is another form of ducking responsibility, and this is not the first time Congress has pulled this sort of stunt.