I am so sick of this petty little POS tyrant.
Here’s another way to do it:
Congress Suit Against Obama’s Immigration Executive Order For Violation of Separation of Powers
POWERS
1. Obama will claim that he has absolute executive power to pardon. This is true. A president’s pardon power is absolute.
2. Obama will claim he has prosecutorial discretion in the enforcement of the laws. This is generally true in terms of how an executive prioritizes the allocation of resources. However, it is a matter of degree. The wholesale suspension of the laws in a given area is a different matter. This was a power exercised by medieval kings, and Obama himself has stated he is no “emperor” is annulling the enforcement of laws by a stroke of the pen. The nature and degree of the executive order does matter here.
3. The grant of special rights and privileges, that Congress has not afforded illegal aliens, is a completely different matter. To use executive authority to bestow working documents etc., is a matter that under the enumerated powers of Art I, Section 8 Cl. 4 belongs exclusively to Congress
NOTE: Kliendienst v. Mandel 408 U.S. 753(1972): “over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete that it is over the admission of aliens.”
STANDING
4. The Court in Raines v. Byrd 521 U.S. 811 (1997) held that Two U.S. Senators and for members of the House did not have standing to have the Line Item Veto law declared unconstitutional. In doing so that Court distinguished Coleman v. Miller 307 U.S. 433, (1939) where the Court allowed Kansas state legislators to sue to challenge the participation of the state Lieutenant Governor in the state Senate’s deadlocked vote on a federal constitutional amendment.
The court found that in both Coleman and Raines there had to be more that an “abstract dilution of institutional legislative power” to confer standing.
In Raines the dilution was abstract, in Coleman it was not.
5. What Obama’s Executive Order does is it occupies a field of legislative power exclusively reserved for Congress and hence the dilution of institutional power is not abstract but concrete and certain. It is no argument to say that this use of executive power may be nullified by Congress. Nullification through veto belongs to the Executive over Congressional legislation BEFORE it becomes law.
Congress does not nullify. It amends or repeals existing legislation or passes new laws. Obama has violated separation of powers because of the “institutional injury” to the legislative branch in a concrete and clear way by bestowing benefits to illegals.
Time for a JOINT SENATE-HOUSE RESOLUTION opposing amnesty AND benefits and for Congress to bring immediate suit in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia seeking expedited review since it involves a dispute between two branches of the national government.