Suing Big Government into submission

This week, House Speaker John Boehner announced that his caucus is thinking about suing the White House over President Obama's abuses of power this week. (Technically, Boehner merely announced that an announcement is forthcoming, which is the purest example of a "trial balloon" you'll ever see. If the goal of sparking a national conversation on the separation of powers is achieved by the pundit wrangling over the very idea of filing such a suit, Boehner and Co. might be spared the expense of ever filing the actual court papers.)

The big objections to this idea are (1) only a somewhat experimental legal theory could give House Republicans the legal standing to file such a suit, by demonstrating that Obama's actions have injured Congress as a group; (2) it'll take forever for such a lawsuit to get anywhere, so we probably wouldn't see any hard-and-fast results until the Michelle Obama Administration; and (3) it's a stunt, a dodge to evade using the very real, but politically dicey, powers Congress was given to rein in the out-of-control executive, namely impeachment and defunding. If American government has degenerated to the point that crucial separation-of-powers issues get settled on Judge Judy, the Founders must be weeping in Heaven.

The dangerous precedent set by the Obama years - upon a stage set by less spectacular, but still significant, abuses by his predecessors from both parties - is that all of the restraints on executive power are basically polite fictions. We live in something much closer to the majority mob rule feared by the Founders than the Constitutional republic they created for us. There's nothing anyone can actually do if the President decides to ignore them, provided public outrage does not swell to the point…

The problem is that for impeachment to be more than symbolic, the Senate must vote to convict and remove from office. Unless there’s a radical change in the composition of the Senate this fall, which seems less and less likely every day, the House can impeach all it wants and it’s going to have no effect. Do you really think Obama cares?

As for defunding, Obama simply vetoes what he can, and ignores the rest.

That’s the whole point of this lawsuit: making Obama not only stop proclaiming law through regulatory means, but making him enforce the ones that Congress has passed and that he himself has had to sign.

I don’t know if it will work, of course, but I really think that it’s worth trying. And maybe it will at least attract some press attention.

There was a good editorial in the WSJ today marveling at the fact that Dems in the Senate don’t seem to mind that Obama is usurping their powers, too, and not enforcing even the laws that the Dem-controlled Senate has passed. The editors pointed out that Dems themselves should support this lawsuit, but the Obama-motivated control of Harry Reid over the Senate is so fierce that they have been virtually silenced.

Re: “Unless there’s a radical change in the composition of the Senate this fall, which seems less and less likely...”

I agree.

We need 6 pick-up Senate seats for a majority.

But, 8 of 12 “Battleground States” have multiple polls that show Republicans either tied with or trailing the Democrat.

Plus, we have a very real risk of losing Republican seats in Kentucky, Georgia, and, incredibly, Mississippi.

And the news only gets worse in the future.

After the 2020 Census, after re-districting in 2022, I don't think we can get a majority in the House of Representatives, either.

Republicans have only themselves to blame.

Since the Reagan Amnesty in 1986, the Democrats have imported 20 million legal Socialist voters.

Many Republicans support that policy.

Many more Republicans have watched this completely legal “electoral theft” and have done nothing to stop it.

When will Boehner act?

Boehner is more tearful and jubilant about his rise through the ranks to become speaker. "Acting" to curb injustices against the citizens of the republic would be much more difficult for John than it was for him to get to this position.

The Political Approach

When a politician views society from the seclusion of his office, he is struck by the spectacle of the inequality that he sees. He deplores the deprivations which are the lot of so many of our brothers, deprivations which appear to be even sadder when contrasted with luxury and wealth.

Perhaps the politician should ask himself whether this state of affairs has not been caused by old conquests and lootings, and by more recent legal plunder. Perhaps he should consider this proposition: Since all persons seek well-being and perfection, would not a condition of justice be sufficient to cause the greatest efforts toward progress, and the greatest possible equality that is compatible with individual responsibility? Would not this be in accord with the concept of individual responsibility which God has willed in order that mankind may have the choice between vice and virtue, and the resulting punishment and reward?

But the politician never gives this a thought. His mind turns to organizations, combinations, and arrangements — legal or apparently legal. He attempts to remedy the evil by increasing and perpetuating the very thing that caused the evil in the first place: legal plunder. We have seen that justice is a negative concept. Is there even one of these positive legal actions that does not contain the principle of plunder?

/"The Law" - Bastiat

Boehner's ascendence, arrogance and ego will not allow him to see the greater destruction caused. He is grateful that his place in history is…in the books. He will do everything that he can to not tarnish his history.

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.