Will Suing Obama Be a 'Historic Step' or an 'Embarrassing Loser'?

National Journal ^ | July 16, 2014 | Billy House

[don-o]

House Republicans officially launched the legislative process of suing President Obama at a hearing Wednesday, with legal experts describing the plan as everything from a "historic step to addressing a constitutional crisis" to "an embarrassing loser" in the courts.

From Republicans, such as Pete Sessions of Texas, there is insistence that truly profound issues are at stake, with claims that Obama has not been faithfully executing his constitutional duty to carry out laws passed by Congress. As chairman of the House Rules Committee, Sessions opened the hearing by describing the Republican effort as seeking an urgent "rebalancing" of the separation of powers between branches of government.

But Louise Slaughter, the Rules Committee's top Democrat, was somewhat less dramatic in her view, dryly likening any expectation of the suit's success in the courts to Alice in Wonderland's "thinking of six impossible things before breakfast." She also described the legal action as "preposterous" and a "purely political exercise" geared to a midterm election year.

snip

Meanwhile, four constitutional experts—two called to testify for each side—gave the committee their own conflicting views of whether Speaker John Boehner's planned litigation could pass basic legal muster. Regardless, the Rules Committee, controlled by Republicans, is intent on finalizing language to a resolution to proceed with the lawsuit.

House members are to vote on that resolution by the end of July, before their annual August break.

For strategic legal reasons, Republicans say their lawsuit will focus specifically on Obama's delay of the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate last year. But they say they are also upset over a range of administrative actions in areas from environmental law to immigration law.

[H.Akston]

Note to self: Boehner should say that he will drop the lawsuit if the Senate goes Red this November. Right now he should present himself as a desperate man who sees no other viable solution to a lawless president than the lawsuit, but he would rather be doing the people’s business (which is what Clinton said after lying about Lewinsky), and he could do that with a Senate that isn’t just a puppet for the president. God the GOP needs a PR coach.
In fact he should be publicly pleading for a veto-proof congressional majority, so that he could dispense with these last resort measures and make progress on the things he’s listed here, which nobody is talking about - a “help me help you, America” plea going into the mid-terms:
http://www.speaker.gov/jobs
He won’t get the majority, but it would go a long way towards dispelling myths about conservatives being obstructionists, when the truth is the opposite.

[Georgia Girl 2]

I’ll take embarrassing loser for $500 Alex.

[glennaro]

It may turn out to be either ... but one thing is for certain: under our Constitution it is necessary.