The Obama Administration previously filed its Motion to Dismiss in the challenge by the United States House of Representatives v. Burwell. As many of you know, I am lead counsel in the action. The Obama Administration is seeking to block the court from hearing the merits of our Complaint and below is our filing today in defense of the right of the House of Representatives to be heard in the federal court. The case is before Judge Rosemary M. Collyer of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
The filing concerns “standing” and the right of a house of Congress to appear in a federal court. In deference to the Court, we will confine our specific responses to our filing today before Judge Collyer.
I am honored to be on this brief with a brilliant legal team from the General Counsel’s office of the United States House of Representatives, including General Counsel Kerry Kircher, Deputy General Counsel William Pittard, Senior Assistant General Counsel Todd Tatelman, Assistant Counsel Eleni Roumel, Assistant Counsel Isaac Rosenberg, and Assistant Counsel Kimberly Hamm.
We remain confident of both the standing and the merits of this historic challenge by the House of Representatives.
Jonathan Turley
Lead Counsel
Here are today’s filings: Opp’n to Mot. to Dismiss (Feb. 27, 2015) (ECF No. 22)
Sandy Hemming
I will quote you
According to the Washington Post, 8 million people could lose health insurance. Hooray! That’s 8 million mooches who need to get a real job. Congratulations Mr Turley.
Americans very lucky to have court system to resolve fight. Chinggis’ great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather resolve fight by killing, pillaging, burning. Burn yaks to the ground, make ground yak (not ground beef). Don’t have beef with Chinggis’ ancestors or end up dead. Best way to avoid beef with Chinggis’ ancestors is to become vegetarian. Chinggis think Boehner like to trample Ted Cruz with herd of yaks, but not work because Cruz has never herd of yaks.
seems the regulars have no interest in this post. they prefer to melt snowballs.
Fifty years from now students will be studying how the Constitution was saved with the courage of the House of Representatuves and a group of attorneys, led by Professor Jonathan Turley. Another win for the best country the world has ever known!
Do you think anyone will quote me?
BarkinDog raised the Standing To Sue issue on this blog the very day that this case as filed. If you read the brief at page 22 you can see that the issue of a majority of voters in Congress standing up for me if I am in the minority, has not been addressed. Each member stands on two feet. No one can stand in a member’s shoes. If BarkinDog was still with us I am sure he would articulate this better.
If I was a Congressman from a state and was in a 49 to 51 vote minority, I would not want the majority to speak for me in court. Standing to sue. I would intervene and move to dismiss. I am surprised that someone has not done so.
Thank you Dr. Turley!
I support the idea Professor Turley is defending our Constitution and not a political party. Our Constitution is the foundation of our country whose under pining is based in our obedience to the principles of the Founders. Erosion of Constitutional principles by EO overreach shakes the very freedoms some in our society take for granted. If this president is allowed to erode our Constitution the next will have even more power to do so. If nothing else Essayons!
Tom, an announcement of actions and a link to their documentation hardly seems like a “discussion” of it in this forum. It’s a good way to keep those who are interested in it informed of its progress if they want to read more about it.
since you’re personally involved in the suit, I think it’s appropriate that you not discuss it in this forum
Prof. Turley – I don’t always agree with you, but I always respect you. Your willingness to stand up for the Constitution on this issue, despite your support for the President and his policies makes you a truly honest and ethical man. You know that the means matter, even when you support the intended ends. Thank you for being a true patriot.
Thank you Dr. Turley!
Your actions in defense of the constitution & the rule of law may well be instrumental in stopping our nation’s long slide into tyranny.
I agree with OTB.
otb, Great comment.
I support this lawsuit moving forward for two reasons. One, what other way is there to put a check on the type of executive excess demonstrated by the current President? (For all those who object to that sentence, try to honestly assess how you will feel if and when these types of excesses are practiced by a President you do not support unilaterally implementing policies you do not support? Second, if one truly believe that the current President has not exceeded his authority, one should not shy away from a judicial review of that authority. So, I say the case should be litigated and we should settle the issue once and for all (I presume this case will go all the way to SCOTUS eventually). If the President prevails, his critics will be silenced (at least as much as anyone is silenced these days). If the President’s actions are deemed unconstitutional, that will guide future Presidents. Either way, the country will be better and stronger for it. So, if you believe the President has not exceeded his constitutional authority, don’t rail against this lawsuit, embrace it (for if your interpretation of the President’s constitutional authority is correct, your position will be vindicated).
Art, Art, Art, Why so angry? Don’t you love the Constitution, or do you just love Obama?
Some don’t like your legal opinions, just your scientific ones.
I have been a fan of your blogs for years but I am truly disappointed that you would represent this group of cretins.
We’re all behind you..well, most of us anyway.