Academia, Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Society, Supreme Court

HOUSE FILES CHALLENGE OVER THE CHANGES TO THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

800px-Capitol_Building_Full_ViewToday, we filed our complaint United States House of Representatives v. Burwell (Case 1:14-cv-01967), in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The House’s complaint contains eight counts concerning constitutional and statutory violations of law related to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). There are a myriad of unilateral amendments to this Act, ordered by President Obama’s Administration, which could be the subject of a challenge, and there are a number of changes that are already being litigated, including King v. Burwell, which has been accepted by the Supreme Court for review. The House’s complaint, however, focuses on the Administration’s usurpation not only of the House’s Article I legislative authority, but also of the defining “power of purse.” Both of these powers were placed exclusively in Article I by the Framers of our Constitution. These constitutional and statutory claims are highly illustrative of the current conflict between the branches over the basic principles of the separation of powers. The House’s complaint seeks to reaffirm the clear constitutional lines of separation between the branches – a doctrine that is the very foundation of our constitutional system of government. To put it simply, the complaint focuses on the means rather than ends. The complaint is posted below.

This is not a new question. Indeed, in some respects, it is the original question. The Framers were well aware that governmental actors would seek to aggrandize power within the system the Framers had created. In Federalist 51, James Madison warned that “[i]n framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” Accordingly, the Framers put into place what Madison called “the necessity of auxiliary precautions” to maintain the balance of powers within the system. Such precautions are of little value absent judicial review to maintain the lines of separation; to arrest what Madison called the “encroaching nature” of power.

Once again, as lead counsel, I have to remain circumspect in any public statements on the filing in deference to the Court and the legal process.

Jonathan Turley
Lead Counsel

Here is the Complaint: House v. Burwell (D.D.C.) – Complaint (FILED)

220px-Meade_and_Prettyman_Courthouse

419 thoughts on “HOUSE FILES CHALLENGE OVER THE CHANGES TO THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT”

  3. The Obama & Liberal Press incest family. . . no wonder he had the press in his back pocket . . . .

    ABC News executive producer Ian Cameron is married to Susan Rice, National Security Adviser.

    CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of Ben Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications.

    ABC News correspondent Claire Shipman is married to recent White House Press Secretary Jay Carney

    ABC News and Uni-vision reporter Matthew Jaffe is married to Katie Hogan, Obama’s Deputy Press Secretary

    ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama’s Special Adviser Elizabeth Sherwood

    CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to former Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Secretary Tom Nides.

    National Barack Channel is owned by the White House.

    MSNBC Alex Wagner is married to Obama administration’s senior adviser Sam Kass, currently the president’s senior nutrition policy adviser.

    Sure does redefine “Incestuous” let alone conflict of interest. Nepotism be damned. Looks like a common gene pool that needs a heavy shot of Clorox. How can the message go wrong when you have friends like this in the media. However, I wonder why these networks refuse to run the amnesty announcement and the explosive John Gruber’s confessions of a liberal elitist x6. I feel for Prof. Turley because he’s about to be excoriated by the incestuous media by proxy of the Obama administration.

  10. Hmmm. This kind of deck stacking does kind of tickle my Muse. . .

    Venue Practice To Deceive???
    An Irish Poem by Squeeky Fromm

    The President needed a quorum
    Of scholars of law to be for him.
    But, with bad rationales,
    One must call on one’s pals!
    Don’t they call this stuff shopping the forum???

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    Note. For non-legal people, <i< shopping the forum means:

    Forum shopping is a practice adopted by litigants to get their cases heard in a particular court that is likely to provide a favorable judgment.

    http://definitions.uslegal.com/f/forum-shopping/

  13. Sandi, this guy has a personality flaw that makes him scoff at people with whom he needs to work with. The same flaw that makes him laugh and play golf a minute after talking about beheading of a live human. This is a problem that I think will be hard to overcome for him.

  14. Squeaky, here we go. Who cares what those 10 lawyers think? This is typical liberal lead the lemmings over the cliff. Tomorrow, 50 lawyers decry Obama’s overreach. And on we go. Does anybody know specifics? He said once, must speak English. Still true? Since he decided it he’ll probably ask a department to write the rules instead of working with Congress as he should, and don’t yell about partisanship! Partisanship is a fact. However, I believe the Congress would work to avoid the chaos of ACA. He’s doing this because he knows JT will win his case. Working with Congress and no leaks from either side might prove it can work it has for 43 Presidents. It can with 44.

  15. I saw JT on Fox News recently. I believe he had said that the EO on immigration will not be constitutional, as it will exceed the legal power. If I understood it right, then shouldnt it be added as another example of lawless behavior with this lawsuit?

  17. I doubt the MSM will ever do this investigation. The thing I find the most problematic is that Harvard has a professor who had endorsed Obama during his campaign, and for him now to sign on this letter shows that he is clueless how he may come across due to this history of his support of the president. I think Gruber should have also signed this letter.

    I really think these ivy league professors are living in a bubble with no clue about the real world. Wonder if Mr Tribe has actually tried a case recently.

  18. Here is something hilarious for a Saturday afternoon:

    10 Legal Scholars Defending Immigration Action Have Democratic Ties!!!

    Of the 10 legal scholars, seven are registered Democrats. Two live in states that don’t release party affiliation, but they both donate exclusively to Democratic candidates. The lone Republican, Eric Posner, is also an exclusive Democratic donor and has repeatedly written that Obama can literally “do whatever he wants” when it comes to executive authority.

    Three of the scholars work at the University of Chicago, where Obama taught constitutional law.

    One scholar, Lee Bollinger, is the president of Columbia University, where Obama did his undergrad work. Bollinger is also directly involved in the effort to make Columbia the site of Obama’s presidential library.

    Walter Dellinger, another letter writer, served in the Clinton administration and is friends with Justice Elena Kagan, who was nominated by Obama.

    Then, there’s Laurence Tribe, a mentor to Obama at Harvard Law School, who called him “the best student I ever had and the most exciting research assistant.” He also campaigned for Obama.

    There is a video at the link. This was on Megyn Kelly last night.

    http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/11/21/10-scholars-defended-immigration-action-have-democratic-ties

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  19. Joan, your comment should also be shown on FoxNews when they show the gruberisms of high information voters like Gruber and yourself. The tone of your comment shows the contempt you have for the voters/people who do not agree with you. What if in the next 5-10 years you realize that you were wrong? Has that never happened to you before?

  20. She first establishes her base line, defining the mob as “an irrational, childlike, often violent organism that derives its energy from the group. Intoxicated by messianic goals, the promise of instant gratification, and adrenaline-pumping exhortations, mobs create mayhem, chaos, and destruction, leaving a smoldering heap of wreckage for their leaders to climb to power.”

    Hmm, sounds like the teaparty to me.

    1. earsoftheworld, you can’t seriously believe the people in the tea party would do these heinous things. If you do, get help. There are lots of things/people I don ‘t like, but I don’t compare them to violent mobs. This is one of my issues with liberals. They jump to irrationality in a flash. Pelosi calls JT “a TV lawyer” and Reid says Romney never paid taxes. I could not support that stupidity. Lots of people don’t like some tea party candidates, but don’t smear them as you do. I plan to attend a tea party event when I can to see for myself. I find that to be the best way to find out about anything.

Comments are closed.