Today, 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)
“As Stephen Miller asks: “What’s Obama’s historical legacy if everything he does can be undone via executive order?” Look at the bind he has put his party in. If their entire agenda is enacted by executive fiat, then everything depends on an unbroken string of victories in presidential campaigns.
One lesson from all those science fiction dystopias is that the dictator’s power grab always breeds discontent and rebellion. In two years, a lot of Democrats could be looking around at the wreckage of their agenda and cursing the day they embraced the temporary illusion of unilateral executive power.”
http://thefederalist.com/2014/11/21/president-palpatine-obama-dissolves-the-old-republic/
I’m grateful that the men in my life aren’t disgusting cads and have enough sense not to talk about things in vulgar graphic ways on a general public forum.
Olly, Bingo! It was a pleasant Sunday morning and afternoon anyway. Thinking of the “thankful” post of raff’s, we can all be thankful for that at least.
Perhaps if we cared more about children already born we would be a better society also. But of course it’s far more important to own guns and keep them near and dear.
Nick,
Maybe that wasn’t an anti-gun statement but a rather sick attempt to defend pro-choice.
A society would benefit greatly from more kindness of strangers than more guns.
Women are much more responsible w/ firearms than men. I have great respect for women who ignore the hand wringers and take steps to protect themselves and their children. It looks like Squeeky, Jet and DBQ are not one to let PC influence them or the ridicule of other women who tell them guns are bad. You are the real feminists, not depending upon the kindness of strangers or donut eating cops to protect you. Squeeky, consider a wooden bat. They pack a more powerful punch, but are a bit heavier than aluminum. But, I’m sure you have the limbs to swing it!
Good advice Jettexas.
shooting someone for running off with property isn’t worth it. Let them have it, you can replace it
This is especially true. You can replace stuff. It isn’t worth it to get into a conflict. We have our armaments handy in case of stranger danger.
Mossberg 500 Persuader for home defense. You don’t have to be very precise with that gun if you are in a defensive inside the house position. Sorry about the drywall 🙁 I don’t go outside at night unless I am armed. Again shotgun or maybe hand gun. Due to the threat of mountain lions and other predators. It is really really dark at night here. The hunting rifles and hunting shotguns are kept in a gun safe.
When you have children in the house, you do need to be especially careful about keeping guns away from children. PLUS you need to educate your children about guns at a very early age so they know that they are not toys and not to touch things that do not belong to them. That goes for more than just guns. Keep your grimy hands off of my stuff…..or something like that. The kids need to learn boundaries.
Guns are tools. The same as chainsaws, skillsaws, rotohammers, nail guns any other power tool. Misused, they can cause injury. People who are afraid of guns are basically uneducated and ignorant about them.
Seriously, a little paranoia about possible rioting? Keep the guns in the same room with you? Really? How many kids accidentally shoot themselves with their paranoid parents’ guns?
http://media2.wxyz.com//photo/2013/08/19/3_year_old_Dundee_boy_dies_after_acciden_846000000_20130819172058_640_480.JPG
@Jettexas
Thank you for the advice! I also have a 5 shot 38 that I carry in my purse wherever I go. The 357 gun is too big to carry around, so it is for home defense. My mother bought a real cute little 6 shot 32 caliber gun. He said she could not really manage a bigger one. For mine, the gun guy sold me some really cool bullets that are called “FTX”. They have shiny metal on the end of them, with little groove thingies. He says it has “stopping power.” But the darn things are like a $1 per bullet! I also have an AK47 that my father gave me a few months ago, but it is for like if there is a really big riot, or if a motorcycle gang invades the neighborhood, or there really is ever a zombie apocalypse. On top of that I have a machete, an aluminum baseball bat, and a wooden sword that I stole from my last boyfriend. Plus, I kind of have a mean streak when I need it.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
XYZ ~
I listened to that interview. I also read the Intelligence Report and find it to be suspect. Democrat or Republican, the intelligence committee isn’t innocent here. I can’t help but feel, their covering up for someone. On the other hand, this trip by Ambassador Stephens was not planned well. I also believe he was doing a arms deal or gun running with Turkey. I think both parties are involved in it or had knowledge of it and that report is covering up for someone. It was bad intelligence or the Ambassador and three other people would be alive today.
@Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter ~
Good for you to take up arms to protect yourself. I don’t know the laws in Missouri but here is a link: http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/missouri.pdf
Always remember if they are coming at you, or break into your house, you can shoot. Don’t shoot a person in retreat or chase them down to shoot them, unless they have shown deadly force. In other words, they have a gun or one pointed at you or a family member.
Don’t shoot through a door or window. Always keep your finger off of the trigger, unless you intend to fire. Your home is your property and your car is an extension of your home. If your car gets broken into, think carefully about using deadly force, shooting someone for running off with property isn’t worth it. Let them have it, you can replace it. I’m not a lawyer but do know guns laws in my state.
Keep your gun in whatever room you are in, because you never know where the break-in might occur and you want to have it handy. A person can still kill you with a knife running at you from 20 ft away, you won’t be able to draw fast enough to stop them, so keep that in mind. I hope you don’t have to deal with any chaos caused by Ferguson, but you did the right thing by getting a gun. Look at it as helping the cops protect yourself, until they can get there to help you. Stay safe!
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/43/bb/35/43bb356d7561f794865d76de8d5bd523.jpg
xyz, I think the MSM is so in the tank they HAVE to take it in the ass from this Administration. They have been punked like a newbie inmate. Once a thug has punked you, they OWN you. Obama and the Chicago thugs OWN the MSM. They’re complicit as Attkisson is proving. I think the feces will eventually hit the fan, but not until their cult leader is playing golf as a private citizen.
This is CNN (self absorbed “journalists” and mouthpiece for administration):
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/11/23/Lindsey-Graham-Benghazi-Report-full-of-crap
anyone else has a problem with the anchor’s tone, does she look like a journalist or an agent of this administration? By the way, why no one confronted the president in a press conference about what he had said in the debate to Romney and what he had actually said to CBS, in the portion of the interview that they had concealed at that time ( link i posted above of C=span interview with Sharyl A). Does journalism stops after election and people dont have to be held accountable for what they say and do?
xyz,
I agree we would benefit greatly if the media would act as the fourth pillar and not the mouthpiece of government. That being said, the fatal mistake is believing every person elected, at least in “your” party, has the necessary “good” character for the place.
I posted a veto from Madison above but your post makes me think that even the framers of this government had to campaign and prove they were worthy of the job.
Nick, to me the media is THE reason that a president can get away with a bad character and elected and reelected. A president with a good character can control the primitive impulses, but if that integrity is not there then the constitution suffers. By the way, it is our constitution that, in my opinion, created the environment that brought Einsteins to the US. I find it very sad that I have not seen more people like JT coming forward to expose the lawlessness. I want a lawsuit people vs media of the US.
But it’s all for the greater good; right?
“In conclusion, I can make you this promise: If you like your weak economy, you can keep your weak economy.” Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Economic Productivity by Casey Mulligan (University of Chicago)
http://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/current?hsCtaTracking=91f6f006-b1e0-48e4-92c9-ee54f541ec40%7Ca1273ad3-9cbf-4db5-b513-672aecee09f2&utm_campaign=Imprimis&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-82eA7yT2NHXc9Y6oDKCqHrrkcLA7fZRQqVgaN7M1I-Xvz8nYnHSChOzlnZcIRi2N1SmZn8IHdG_MNK79AaBi_TjXu7vw&utm_content=15010248&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=15010248
nicks@10:11
Liberals like to dominate.
=============================
coming from you that’s too funny.
look at the five threads above this and see how many times you’re one (or more) of the first five comments.
It hasn’t always been the case where our government ruled by precedent; or more specifically the precedent of ignoring the constitutional authority they took an oath to “support and defend”. One would think it of paramount importance to follow the original intent of the architect of the constitution, but then that would require a degree of humility uncommon in today’s political class. This veto by Madison is THE precedent by which our government should function. Here is part of it:
“To refer the power in question to the clause “to provide for common defense and general welfare” would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation, as rendering the special and careful enumeration of powers which follow the clause nugatory and improper. Such a view of the Constitution would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them, the terms “common defense and general welfare” embracing every object and act within the purview of a legislative trust. It would have the effect of subjecting both the Constitution and laws of the several States in all cases not specifically exempted to be superseded by laws of Congress, it being expressly declared “that the Constitution of the United States and laws made in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges of every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” Such a view of the Constitution, finally, would have the effect of excluding the judicial authority of the United States from its participation in guarding the boundary between the legislative powers of the General and the State Governments, inasmuch as questions relating to the general welfare, being questions of policy and expediency, are unsusceptible of judicial cognizance and decision.” James Madison’s veto of The Bonus Bill 1817
http://www.constitution.org/jm/18170303_veto.htm