• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boehner plans to file suit against Obama over alleged abuse of executive power

AJiveMan

Paying To Play
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
5,775
Reaction score
2,064
Location
wisconSIN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nst-obama-over-alleged-abuse-executive-power/

Where did the crybaby get his gonads at? Did he buy them or grow them? :lol:

http://news.msn.com/us/boehner-says-to-file-lawsuit-over-obama-executive-actions

WASHINGTON, June 25 (Reuters) - U.S. House Speaker John Boehner said on Wednesday he is planning to file a lawsuit alleging that President Barack Obama has abused his executive authority by implementing policies without congressional approval.

How can an overly sensitive wimp come up with something like this? did he drink some tea or something?
 
Last edited:
Obama is out of control and must be stopped.

ExecutiveOrders_FourYearTerms.jpg
 
it is about time someone decided to put at stop to that the non-sense going on up there.
obama changes every law he doesn't like which is illegal and against the constitution he doesn't have the power to change and create law yet he does it anyway.
took them long enough.
 

I'm actually in support of this. The article includes this quote, ""My view is the president has not faithfully executed the laws," he said. "What we have seen clearly over the last five years is an effort to erode the power of the Legislative Branch." That's ridiculous. The previous administration was an eight year effort to expand the power of the Executive at the expense of the legislative, that built on the roughly entire post-Watergate period, and Obama has continued that same trajectory.

But if the GOP files a good faith lawsuit to test the boundaries, that's a good thing IMO. I kind of doubt the suit will be anything more than red meat to the masses, if it's ever filed, but I would like to be surprised. These are important question on the separation of powers.

Just one more observation, much of the problem rests with modern governance. The EPA, for example, is empowered by the legislation to broad discretion to accomplish its mandate. CONGRESS granted that power, and the SC has upheld the EPA's authority, regularly. It's a little disingenuous for Congress to complain that the Executive branch is exercising powers the Congress granted it. Congress can terminate those powers the same way they were granted, with legislation. The same thing happens with tax law. Congress writes a few lines, then delegates to the Executive branch - Treasury - the power to develop regulations that accomplish the goals of the law. These are BROAD powers, but they're delegated by Congress to Executive. They could, if they wanted, simply write the regulations themselves or legislatively amend them, which happens often enough.

The ACA granted a great deal of discretion to the Executive branch to carry out the ACA's mandates. Maybe Obama has gone too far - who knows. But testing that in court is a fine thing IMO.
 
I'm actually in support of this. The article includes this quote, ""My view is the president has not faithfully executed the laws," he said. "What we have seen clearly over the last five years is an effort to erode the power of the Legislative Branch." That's ridiculous. The previous administration was an eight year effort to expand the power of the Executive at the expense of the legislative, that built on the roughly entire post-Watergate period, and Obama has continued that same trajectory.

But if the GOP files a good faith lawsuit to test the boundaries, that's a good thing IMO. I kind of doubt the suit will be anything more than red meat to the masses, if it's ever filed, but I would like to be surprised. These are important question on the separation of powers.

Just one more observation, much of the problem rests with modern governance. The EPA, for example, is empowered by the legislation to broad discretion to accomplish its mandate. CONGRESS granted that power, and the SC has upheld the EPA's authority, regularly. It's a little disingenuous for Congress to complain that the Executive branch is exercising powers the Congress granted it. Congress can terminate those powers the same way they were granted, with legislation. The same thing happens with tax law. Congress writes a few lines, then delegates to the Executive branch - Treasury - the power to develop regulations that accomplish the goals of the law. These are BROAD powers, but they're delegated by Congress to Executive. They could, if they wanted, simply write the regulations themselves or legislatively amend them, which happens often enough.

The ACA granted a great deal of discretion to the Executive branch to carry out the ACA's mandates. Maybe Obama has gone too far - who knows. But testing that in court is a fine thing IMO.

How about a do nothing congress with an approval rating lower than the president.

Yes, we all know Rick Perry types would like to have dismantled the EPA.

The ACA was passed as law, not EO.
 
This lawsuit won't go anywhere, it will just draw attention to Republican talking points. That's the purpose.
 
How about a do nothing congress with an approval rating lower than the president.

Yes, we all know Rick Perry types would like to have dismantled the EPA.

The ACA was passed as law, not EO.

Is there a point there? I really don't know how to respond.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nst-obama-over-alleged-abuse-executive-power/

Where did the crybaby get his gonads at? Did he buy them or grow them? :lol:




How can an overly sensitive wimp come up with something like this? did he drink some tea or something?

Maybe Boener actually reads newspapers and listens to those who are smarter than himself ? Personally Obama's surge of illegal aliens at the border is when Obama crossed the red line in the sand.

Maybe Boener stopped and read the Constitution ?

But I noticed nobody on the DP mentioned George Wills column in the past few days while it was covered on most of the other political websites. Why was that ?


Obama Violates Separation of Powers
Monday, 23 Jun 2014 09:41 AM

By George Will


>" What philosopher Harvey Mansfield calls "taming the prince" — making executive power compatible with democracy's abhorrence of arbitrary power — has been a perennial problem of modern politics. It is now more urgent in America than at any time since the Founders, having rebelled against George III's unfettered exercise of "royal prerogative," stipulated that presidents "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

Serious as are the policy disagreements roiling Washington, none is as important as the structural distortion threatening constitutional equilibrium. Institutional derangement driven by unchecked presidential aggrandizement did not begin with Barack Obama, but his offenses against the separation of powers have been egregious in quantity, and qualitatively different.

Regarding immigration, healthcare, welfare, education, drug policy, and more, Obama has suspended, waived, and rewritten laws, including the Affordable Care Act. It required the employer mandate to begin this year. But Obama wrote a new law, giving to certain-sized companies a delay until 2016, and stipulating that other employers must certify they will not drop employees to avoid the mandate. Doing so would trigger criminal perjury charges; so, he created a new crime, that of adopting a business practice he opposes.

Presidents must exercise some discretion in interpreting laws, must have some latitude in allocating finite resources to the enforcement of laws, and must have some freedom to act in the absence of law. Obama, however, has perpetrated more than 40 suspensions of laws. Were presidents the sole judges of the limits of their latitude, they would effectively have plenary power to vitiate the separation of powers, the Founders' bulwark against despotism.

Congress cannot reverse egregious executive aggressions such as Obama's without robust judicial assistance. It is, however, difficult to satisfy the criteria that the Constitution and case law require for Congress to establish "standing" to seek judicial redress for executive usurpations injurious to the legislative institution..."<


Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com Separation of Powers Violated by Obama
 
This lawsuit won't go anywhere, it will just draw attention to Republican talking points. That's the purpose.

I expect that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that there are serious issues unresolved. Lots of liberals complained about the Bush overreaches, and now right wingers aren't happy when Obama exercises the same powers the Bush legal eagles argued vested in the POTUS. If there is a legitimate effort to find the limits, I'm all for it, both for this administration and so left wingers have some idea what's acceptable the next time a GOPer wins the Presidency.
 
Is there a point there? I really don't know how to respond.

Obama already stated that he could work with the congress or without, did you miss that speech? I didn't.
 
But I noticed nobody on the DP mentioned George Wills column in the past few days while it was covered on most of the other political websites. Why was that ?

You just did. Thanks.

Obama Violates Separation of Powers
Monday, 23 Jun 2014 09:41 AM

By George Will

As I said, liberals wrote 1,000 versions of this article during the Bush administration, and my guess is (too lazy to read Will's archived columns) Will was silent or supportive of the Unitary Executive theory and the nearly unchecked Commander in Chief powers asserted by Bush.

If we get an honest effort to test 30 years of more power vesting in the POTUS, great. But no one should pretend this started in January 2009.
 
This is just talk, neither side of the Republocrats are willing to open this can of worms. Each side abuses their power, and they like it that way.

So basically, congress is wasting more taxpayer time and money, did or should we expect anything different?
 
Obama already stated that he could work with the congress or without, did you miss that speech? I didn't.

Again, you're not making an actual point. The POTUS is head of a vast bureaucracy with immense powers delegated to it by Congress. Got that? DELEGATED TO IT BY CONGRESS. So I didn't miss that speech, but to the extent he made an obvious statement that he as POTUS is delegated vast powers to do stuff without further input from Congress, what's the problem? He's doing nothing more than stating the way government functions.

Heck, I'm not sure whether you disagree with me supporting a lawsuit that tests the boundaries, or just think the question is obvious, Obama is a dictator blah blah. If it's the latter, I don't think you paid any attention during the Bush years or know how government works.
 
So basically, congress is wasting more taxpayer time and money, did or should we expect anything different?

Of course not, this is how they roll. Pretend there's a difference, point fingers and gnash teeth. But end of the day, they're same team and won't hold anyone responsible if they can avoid it.
 
Apparently his tan isn't getting him quite enough attention.
 
Boehner plans to file suit against Obama over alleged abuse of executive power | Fox News

Where did the crybaby get his gonads at? Did he buy them or grow them? :lol:

Leader says House plans to sue Obama



How can an overly sensitive wimp come up with something like this? did he drink some tea or something?

The executive does not have the power to ignore laws or to add them. Our congress critters are often guilty of writing overly broad laws and letting the executive "work out the details" but Obama clearly has ignored immigration law and has made numerous changes to the actual PPACA law.
 
How about a do nothing congress with an approval rating lower than the president.

The ACA was passed as law, not EO.

How many times has Obama legislated from the White House and rewrote the ACA ? :lamo

And all of Obama's illegal activities sure has kept Congress busy from supplying guns to the drug cartels, not enforcing our immigration laws, lying to Congress about DADT, the IRS, Benghazi, leaks of classified information, social engineering of the military, violating the War Powers Act, throwing American allies under the bus, appeasing Putin all of the time, declaring that the border with Mexico is secured and embarrassing America by working out with one pound dumbells.
 
AJiveman, since you posted the video, Obama says this:

Some [proposals] require Congressional action....[but] whenever and wherever I can take steps without legislation to....

That's a straightforward statement of the powers of the POTUS. He issued a list of proposed executive actions after that speech. If you have any act that he proposed through EO that was outside his prerogatives, that's the place to debate, not debating WHETHER he CAN do certain things. He obviously CAN do lots as head of the Executive Branch. The limits is the purpose of a legitimate lawsuit.
 
Back
Top Bottom