Posted on 11/21/2014 8:19:25 AM PST by justlittleoleme
Today, we filed our complaint United States House of Representatives v. Burwell (Case 1:14-cv-01967), in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The House’s complaint contains eight counts concerning constitutional and statutory violations of law related to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). There are a myriad of unilateral amendments to this Act, ordered by President Obama’s Administration, which could be the subject of a challenge, and there are a number of changes that are already being litigated, including King v. Burwell, which has been accepted by the Supreme Court for review. The House’s complaint, however, focuses on the Administration’s usurpation not only of the House’s Article I legislative authority, but also of the defining “power of purse.” Both of these powers were placed exclusively in Article I by the Framers of our Constitution. These constitutional and statutory claims are highly illustrative of the current conflict between the branches over the basic principles of the separation of powers. The House’s complaint seeks to reaffirm the clear constitutional lines of separation between the branches – a doctrine that is the very foundation of our constitutional system of government. To put it simply, the complaint focuses on the means rather than ends. The complaint is posted below.
Here is the Complaint: House v. Burwell (D.D.C.) – Complaint (FILED)
(Excerpt) Read more at jonathanturley.org ...
For the record, I hate this lawsuit. Basically, if the GOP were to win this case, then they would essentially succeed in getting Obamacare FULLY implemented, exactly as it was written into law! How frickin’ bass-ackwards is this???
Good...now be ready to immediately file against EO Amnesty.
I think this is what it is actually about, setting precedent that Obama acting without congress like this, is unlawful and unconstitutional.
Don’t hold your breath waiting.
Jane Long wrote:
<<
Good...now be ready to immediately file against EO Amnesty.
>>
************************************************************
With the federal courts now packed with radical leftist judges, how confident are you that the GOP can successfully sue its way into stopping the Kenyan Marxist from regularly and flagrantly violating the U.S. Constitution?
So essentially, they have no idea what they’re doing. Time not to only have Bonehead not speaker, but voted out of office. Preferably a vote of no-confidence to get rid of him sooner.
House Republicans authorized the filing of the lawsuit earlier this year, but it has been delayed by struggles to find a lawyer to file the case. Two law firms dropped the case before Republicans tapped attorney Jonathan Turley to pursue the case.
Shocking that no conservative leaning firm would take the case and they had to hire Liberal (but fair) Turley to take the case. I think I remember that firms did not want the case because they would be blacklisted and lose business. Since Turley is in Academia, he can take the case.
Well, I’m not willing to stop trying. Are you?
I’d rather them use every means available...and try...than DO NOTHING - out of fear of “radical leftist judges”, or backlash, or whatever excuse.
It should have been done the first thing this morning.
And they should have immediately filed for an injunction.
Asleep at the wheel as usual.
Oh boy, precedent, because that legal concept has been so good for this country, and has inspired so many great rulings.
0’s EO Amnesty = No Need for Congress
It should have been done the first thing this morning.
And they should have immediately filed for an injunction.
Agree. And, the Pubbie Governors Assn should’ve been right there with them.
....ZZzzzZZZZzzzz....
EO Amnesty = NO Need for Congress
Tthe people most instrumental in implementing this law (UNIONS) have been shielded from the impact of the law. ART OF WAR is to bring the fight to the people influencing the war but not on the front lines. Bring the Unions into the monster and see how fast they turn on Obama.
The best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it to the letter.
It’s not back asswards. It’s exactly their goal.
They don’t hate Obamacare. They hate that it has his name on it, and not their’s. If it had been named Romneycare, they would have been pleased as could be.
You have the reasoning. Will it hang in there?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.