Posted on 06/15/2011 8:32:03 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
A group of lawmakers plans to file a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the Obama administration, questioning the constitutional and legal justifications for military action in Libya, Fox News has confirmed.
The bipartisan group is being led by Reps. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and Walter Jones, R-N.C., and includes GOP presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul.
Kucinich and Jones will lead a news conference at the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., to outline the claims. But according to the complaint, a copy of which was obtained by Fox News, the group is seeking "injunctive and declaratory relief to protect the plaintiffs and the country from a stated policy of defendant Barack Obama, president of the United States, whereby a president may unilaterally go to war in Libya and other countries without the declaration of war from Congress required by Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
git er done
fools. you don’t sue Obie to make him follow the law. you impeach him for violating it.
What I think of Kucinich and Paul aside (I’m not familiar with Jones), this could be very interesting.
Actually, a successful suit could be added cause for a case for impeachment.
I have always thought of Kucinich as a nutcase but I’m glad he is doing this.
I don’t think the courts will touch it. This should be handled within Congress.
He is a nutcase. But he, like Paul, is being a consistent nutcase. We’ll see how far this goes, but any light that can be shed on Obama’s extra-Constitutional actions is good.
Ditto to what you said.
Just hit Drudge.
This will be like Monica but oh so very much worse. Get ready for the real shit to hit the fan now.
I agree with others on this thread that the proper venue would be through Congressional action, but as another means of getting at the administration, I’m all for it. It remains to be seen how far it goes, but hey, I like the kitchen sink approach as much as anything.
Oops, I must have used a wrong html code. The balance of my reply was lost.
What I wrote was, it remains to be seen how far this goes, but I like the ‘thousand cuts’ approach.
This is an EEO case...you need a paper trail.....
Agreed.
If nothing else, this should be entertaining and give Obama a headache.
Don’t sue, IMPEACH!
Right on, Dennis Kucinich! If he never does anything else right, he nailed this one.
What's wrong with both?
Impeachment would be considered as racist.
Yet another instance where I wish the founding fathers would have been a little more wordy. I wish they would have "spelled out" exactly what "high crimes and misdemeanors" meant. Kinda like I wish they would have spelled out " a well regulated militia."
Then there would be no debate.
“Impeachment would be considered as racist.”
...then just sue the white half...
BINGO
As I understand it the administration will provide a defense of “No Standing” again.
IOW, you don’t matter, are insignificant and maybe don’t even exist.
It’s about time the little Marxist and his pals be reminded that they are not above the constitution. He’s a disgrace.
That could well happen, but could as well be a difficult argument, since they’re congressmen and the filing is based on the Constitution and the absence of a Congressional declaration of war.
Just sayin’...
Well then, we'd be somewhat limited in its application, wouldn't we. Sometimes I wonder if it isn't better having been left vague...
I’d like to see them ALL go over and give the marxist punk a blanket party, Boehner, Reid, Pelosi, hell even Biden. All go over to the white house throw a curtain over him and pummel him with trash cans.
HEY I can fantacize can’t I?
That works both ways.
By that point they started with, “'He shall be removed from his office on impeachment by the House of Representatives, and conviction by the Senate, for Treason, or bribery.”
Why, it was asked, impeachment for treason and bribery only? Treason will not reach many significant offenses. What of attempts to subvert the Constitution? It was moved to add, “or maladministration” after bribery.
James Madison feared it would lead to too many Presidents getting the boot by hostile Congresses.
George Mason motioned to withdraw “maladministration” to substitute, “other high crimes and misdemesnors against the State,” which passed by a 7-4 vote.
The Committee of Style cleaned up his prose to the clause we know today.
I agree with the pol who remarked that an impeachable crime is whatever Congress thinks it is.
If you are a Constitutional junkie, join me this summer as I join the Federal Convention day by day as events unfolded in 1787.
James Madison feared it would lead to too many Presidents getting the boot by hostile Congresses.
George Mason motioned to withdraw “maladministration” to substitute, “other high crimes and misdemesnors against the State,” which passed by a 7-4 vote.
Taking this in context, without knowing further debate, one would take it that attempts to subvert the Constitution would be an impeachable offense.
As I wrote upthread, I believe we're better off with a more malleable wording...
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.