Texas AG Ken Paxton Sues POTUS Over ‘Unlawful’ Signing Of $1.7 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

The Daily Caller ^ | February 16, 2023 | Katelynn Richardson

[Twotone]

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit Wednesday against President Biden for what he describes as the “unlawful” signing of the $1.7 trillion omnibus spending bill.

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 bill, supported by just nine House Republicans, was passed days before Christmas with more than half of the members absent and voting by proxy. Paxton’s case contends that the U.S. Constitution mandates a quorum be present to vote on legislation, without which the House can only “adjourn from day to day” and “compel the attendance of absent Members,” making the bill’s passage illegitimate.

“Though President Biden signed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, his signature was nullity because the act never ‘passed the House of Representatives,'” according to the lawsuit.

Members filed proxy letters under the pretense of the “ongoing COVID-19 pandemic,” though former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi noted at the time it was more “related to the weather” and Republican Texas Rep. Chip Roy slammed absent members for “trying to catch planes” rather than “fighting” for the American people.

“Nowhere does the U.S. Constitution authorize the House to pass trillion-dollar bills when more than half the members are in their homes, vacationing, or are anywhere physically other than the United States Capitol Building,” said Paxton in a statement. “Our Founders would be turning over in their graves if they could see how former Speaker Nancy Pelosi used proxy voting to upend our constitutional system. That is especially true regarding the 1.7 trillion-dollar bill that should have never been ‘passed.’”

[rottweiller_inc]

Well I wish some good luck by I don’t have much hope that anything will come of it

[Repeal The 17th]

Article. I. - Section. 5.
Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections,
Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and
a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; ...
...Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings.

Article. I. - Section. 7.
...But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses
shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names
of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall
be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.

[ConservativeInPA]

quorum kwôr′əm noun
1. The minimal number of officers and members of a committee or organization, usually a majority, who must be present for valid transaction of business. A select group.
2. The minimal density of bacterial cells that results in altered gene expression in a population of bacteria

[SaxxonWoods]

If Republicans were serious about following the Constitution they’d pass a freaking BUDGET! Then there would be no omnibus bills.

It’s all pretend BS posturing. No budget, no spending control.

[traderrob6]

Regardless, he’s right.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

I seem to recall there is some law that congress persons cannot be arrested while trying to get to a vote. If they don’t have to be present then there is no cause for this law.

[Republican Wildcat]

“Political question” the Court will boot immediately.

[jz638]

I seem to recall there is some law that congress persons cannot be arrested while trying to get to a vote. If they don’t have to be present then there is no cause for this law.

That goes back to the whole separation of powers thing. The executive branch (the cops) can't interfere with the legislative branch's business. Unfortunately, this has been interpreted by legislators over the years as a way to basically be above the law.

Unfortunately, that's also going to be why this lawsuit won't end up going anywhere. It's not a bad idea to try, but the judicial branch will probably say "sorry, we can't determine for the legislative branch what "present" means. They get to define that word.

[SaveFerris]

GOOD

[Sgt_Schultze]

A favorable ruling would be hugely fortuitous. Quite possibly most of the Pelosi legislation voted by proxy over the last two years would likewise be canceled. At least this lawsuit explains why the DoJ has taken over the investigation of Paxton.

[BiteYourSelf]

What you said.👍

[taxcontrol]

The AG makes a legitimate argument. Lets see where it goes. Got to get more popcorn though.

[Golden Eagle]

My my wouldn’t that be something!

DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS!

[rottweiller_inc]

Adjust seems like the entire concept of justice has just packed up and moved out of the United States

[Maelstrom]

No budget. No spending.

[AndyJackson]

Not true. You don’t have to have a budget. But you do have to have an appoprition. “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law;”