Truth or consequences... that was one of the first "game show" on television during the early 50's into the 70's. It tried to make a comeback in the in the late 70's and again in the late 80's both times being cancelled after one season. The history of the gameshow kind of encapsulate this push to sue the POTUS. I feel that as a conservative we absolutely need checks and balances on the Presidency regardless of who's in power, otherwise we will have a "Putin" who basically never steps down and has all but wrestled any semblance of control from the People.
Now, Unless you're a "News Junkie" like myself, You might ask "How did we get here?" Briefly it is wrapped up on the poll that appears with this article. It sums up the why if not how of this action. The President is part of the Executive Branch and as such he is granted by our constitution with certain powers as well as the power of "Executive Order". Many will point to the number of "Orders" President Obama has taken, but that was never the issue. It is the scope of those actions that raised the ire of so many within government and without. An Executive Order is LEGALLY binding and that is the crux:
Executive actions are any informal proposals or moves by the president. The term executive action itself is vague and can be used to describe almost anything the president calls on Congress or his administration to do. But most executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress. The terms executive action and executive order are not interchangeable. Executive orders are legally binding and published in the Federal Register, though they also can be reversed by the courts and Congress.
In my research I found that President Obama has written: 184 executive orders from the closing of Gitmo to the recent hiring practices of Government contractors. They have the force of law with limitations and they are subject to be "revoked" by Congressional action or by the Supreme court.. but they are not laws
It has been the scope of the "Orders". By themselves, they aren't really a problem for Obama but they CANNOT be used to modify existing laws.... Example. There is a National Law that says all Buses MUST stop at Railroad crossings... you cannot make and "Order" that say you don't have to stop on Sundays. Why.. It modifies the Law. The SCOTUS is the prime "check" on Presidential powers and this is why the Republicans are emboldened. The "suit" premise is:
GOP leaders have said the lawsuit will focus on the White House's decision to waive the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate without the consent of Congress. http://online.wsj.com/articles/resolution-to-ok-boehner-lawsuit-against-obama-advances-in-house-1406224966
“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. http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2014/06/constitution-check-could-the-house-sue-the-president-for-refusing-to-carry-out-the-laws/
Again I believe we need to reign in the Powers of the presidency and the point of the Suit I agree with BUT the cost is my sticking point as well as it's effectiveness. I don't think it will work and it will cost the tax payers at least 20 Mil (est) and the GOP will not release the cost of it until it is underway. (For comparison the Benghazi probe cost around 15 Mil.) Also is there any precedent: short answer No. And so leads to the effectiveness... even if it succeeds.. this does not curtail the future action of Executive orders and the ACA maybe gutted but until the House takes up the hard work of defunding it then it is here to stay and will have to be reformed at a minimum as long as "budget" monies are being used to administer it.
I close with "Truth or Consequences" like the show, this political theater may run only for a season and get cancelled and we, the American people are left with the consequences. We would be better served if the Congress and House craft legislation or bring the challenge to the SCOTUS then to Revive a "dead" show.