Suing Obama: GOP-led House gives the go-ahead

By From page A12 | July 31, 2014

WASHINGTON — A sharply divided House approved a Republican plan Wednesday to launch a campaign-season lawsuit against President Barack Obama, accusing him of exceeding the bounds of his constitutional authority. Obama and other Democrats derided the effort as a stunt aimed at tossing political red meat to conservative voters.

Just a day before lawmakers were to begin a five-week summer recess, debate over the proposed lawsuit underscored the harshly partisan tone that has dominated the current Congress almost from its start in January 2013.

The vote to sue Obama was 225 to 201. Five conservative Republicans voted with Democrats in opposing the lawsuit. No Democrats voted for it.

Republicans said the legal action, focusing on Obama’s implementation of his prized health care overhaul, was designed to prevent a further presidential power grab and his deciding unilaterally how to enforce laws.

“Are you willing to let any president choose what laws to execute and what laws to change?” asked House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio.

The Republicans also scoffed at Democratic claims that the lawsuit would be a waste of taxpayers’ money.

“What price do you place on the continuation of our system of checks and balances? What price do you put on the Constitution of the United States?” said Rep. Candice Miller of Michigan. “My answer to each is ‘priceless.’”

However, Democrats said the lawsuit would go nowhere and was designed only to encourage conservatives to vote in this November’s congressional elections. They also warned repeatedly that it could be a precursor of a more drastic GOP effort. Said Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y.: “The lawsuit is a drumbeat pushing members of the Republican Party to impeachment.”

Congressional lawsuits against presidents are rare. In 2008, a federal judge backed a suit by Democrats who then controlled the House and were trying to force the Bush administration to honor House subpoenas of senior White House officials. Though the House won the first round in court, that decision was under appeal when a settlement was reached and the lawsuit was dropped.

On Wednesday, neither side wasted time in using the fight to mine campaign contributions and line up support for their candidates.

House Democrats emailed one fundraising solicitation as debate was underway and another moments after the vote, with one saying, “The GOP is chomping at the bit to impeach the president.” And White House Senior Adviser Dan Pfeiffer emailed supporters, saying, ‘This is the least productive Congress in decades. And instead of doing their job, they are suing the president for doing his.”

The Republican Party also went to work. An email called the House vote a “huge step” in curbing Obama and added, “Contribute right now to end Obama’s executive overreach by expanding our Republican majority in the House and gaining a majority in the Senate.”

Though the vote was almost entirely along party lines, five conservative GOP lawmakers opposed the lawsuit: Reps. Paul Broun of Georgia, Scott Garrett of New Jersey, Walter Jones of North Carolina, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Steve Stockman of Texas.

Some prominent conservatives including former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin have called for Obama’s impeachment, and some House GOP lawmakers have not ruled it out. Boehner has said he has no such plans and has called Democratic impeachment talk a “scam” to raise money.

On the road in Kansas City, Missouri, Obama cast the lawsuit as a “political stunt” and a distraction from the public’s priorities.

“Every vote they’re taking like that means a vote they’re not taking to actually help you,” he told his audience. He urged Republicans to “stop just hating all the time.”

By suing Obama to demand that he carry out specific provisions of the 2010 health care overhaul, House Republicans would be asking the courts to hold him to the letter of a law that they all opposed and that the House has voted over 50 times to dismantle.

Republicans have accused Obama of exceeding his powers in a range of areas, saying he has enforced provisions he likes and ignored others.

These include not notifying Congress before releasing five Taliban members from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in exchange for captive Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, blocking the deportation of some children who are in the U.S. illegally and waiving some provisions of the No Child Left Behind education law.

Democrats say Obama has acted legally and has simply used the authority he has as chief executive.

Republicans have not laid out a timetable for actually filing the suit.

As for its chances of legal success, federal courts are often reluctant to intervene in disputes between the executive and legislative branches. For the suit to survive, the GOP would first have to prove that the House had been injured by Obama’s actions. And even if the lawsuit was heard, it is unclear whether it could be decided while Obama was still in office.

Timothy K. Lewis, a former judge in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who was nominated by former President George H.W. Bush, said that with appeals, it would take at least one-and-a-half to two years for the suit to wind through the federal judicial system.

Obama leaves office in January 2017.

Republicans have particularly objected that Obama has twice delayed the law’s so-called employer mandate. The provision requires companies with 50 or more employees working at least 30 hours weekly to offer health care coverage or pay fines, while businesses with fewer than 50 workers are exempt.

The requirement was initially to take effect this year. Now, companies with 50 to 99 employees have until 2016 to comply while bigger companies have until next year.

Democrats warned that the lawsuit could cost taxpayers millions of dollars. Republicans provided no specifics about the potential price tag, but the measure would allow House attorneys to hire outside lawyers and require quarterly public reports on expenditures.


The Associated Press

The Associated Press


Discussion | 14 comments

The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Please read our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy before commenting.

  • PornacJuly 31, 2014 - 7:36 am

    Have previous presidents used such executive action?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895July 31, 2014 - 8:26 am

    Only the white ones.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. SmithJuly 31, 2014 - 8:43 am

    Again with the race card, rlw? Tsk. Tsk. By the way--wasn't Bill Clinton dubbed "America's first Black President?" I believe he also issued executive orders. Obama's race is WAY down on the list of reasons why the GOP vigorously opposes him. It started on the day he declared his intent to "fundamentally change the United States of America." And went downhill from there. No need for race to be brought into it.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • [email protected]July 31, 2014 - 8:56 am

    Mr.S: Like "flip-flop" and "cut and run," "race card" is a phrase that is designed to denigrate thought. I agree race is way down the list on reasons Republican electeds oppose Obama, but it's on the list. More importantly, it's not so far down the list on why Republican VOTERS oppose Obama, and those electeds cater to those voters. This lawsuit is only the most recent manifestation. No other president has been sued by a house if congress for abuse of executive power. It's all theater for the voters. Somehow the Republicans in the House think it will gain them more votes than it will lose them. It's certainly not to save the nation from a tyrant. That's what impeachment is for.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Salty DogJuly 31, 2014 - 11:14 am

    rlw isn't president Obama white no only half white or didn't you know that.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • rlw895July 31, 2014 - 11:18 am

    SD: Sure. I thought about saying "only the 100% white ones," but, you know, how can we be sure?

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Rick WoodJuly 31, 2014 - 11:25 am

    This lawsuit is filed just in time for the November election; not too early to get thrown out of court before the election, and not too late to give time to whip up the base. I mean, after complaining about Obama all this time, how can Republicans face the voters without actually DOING something about it? They risk the tea partiers staying home, and they need that vote. It's crunch time, and when you're desperate, no idea is too stupid.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JimboJuly 31, 2014 - 12:20 pm

    Executive Orders: Obama-157, G.W.Bush-281, Reagan-391

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJuly 31, 2014 - 7:48 am

    GOP suicide...as if they weren't far enough into the toilet.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Mr. SmithJuly 31, 2014 - 8:05 am

    Can we impeach Congress? I'm ready to go to Washington again.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • patrickJuly 31, 2014 - 1:05 pm

    At least NIXON had the courage to resign. His imperial majesty won't even consider that.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • CD BrooksJuly 31, 2014 - 1:16 pm

    Patrick, why should Obama resign? Following your (faulty) logic Bush et al should have been hanged.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • JimboJuly 31, 2014 - 2:51 pm

    CD, 'logic' is based on such things as reality and science. That one believes in neither.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • PornacJuly 31, 2014 - 5:10 pm

    Just want to make this clear. They, Republicans, voted 57 times to stop ACA, now they just voted to sue Obama because he slowed down its implementation. And, we are paying the lawyers to do it. Just got to love them bat###t crazy republicans.

    Reply | Report abusive comment
  • Recent Articles

  • Enter your email address to subscribe and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • Special Publications »

    Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service (updated 4/30/2015) and Privacy Policy (updated 4/7/2015).
    Copyright (c) 2015 McNaughton Newspapers, Inc., a family-owned local media company that proudly publishes the Daily Republic, Mountain Democrat, Davis Enterprise, Village Life and other community-driven publications.