House Sues Obama Over Unconstitutional Action

[The Rabbi]

The Constitution is very clear that expenditures of public money can only be made pursuant to legislation originating in the House. Obama, the "Constitutional scholar" apparently failed to read that part before HHS started spending money on Obamacae subsidies that havent been authorizied by Congress.
So the House voted to sue Obama and his administration, charging them with violating their Constitutional roles.
Finally some action to rein in the most lawless administration in history.
There’s Yet Another Major Lawsuit That Some People Think Could Threaten Obamacare

 

[bodecea]

The Constitution is very clear that expenditures of public money can only be made pursuant to legislation originating in the House. Obama, the "Constitutional scholar" apparently failed to read that part before HHS started spending money on Obamacae subsidies that havent been authorizied by Congress.
So the House voted to sue Obama and his administration, charging them with violating their Constitutional roles.
Finally some action to rein in the most lawless administration in history.
There’s Yet Another Major Lawsuit That Some People Think Could Threaten Obamacare

Finally. This should be fun.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Constitution is very clear that expenditures of public money can only be made pursuant to legislation originating in the House. Obama, the "Constitutional scholar" apparently failed to read that part before HHS started spending money on Obamacae subsidies that havent been authorizied by Congress.
So the House voted to sue Obama and his administration, charging them with violating their Constitutional roles.
Finally some action to rein in the most lawless administration in history.
There’s Yet Another Major Lawsuit That Some People Think Could Threaten Obamacare

Finally. This should be fun.

I agree. Nothing would make me feel better than to have the Supreme Court slap down that imposter in the WHite House and his gang of thugs.

 

[bendog]

JFC what a clown car.

 

[candycorn]

I guess they got tired of trying to overturn the ACA?

Start the countdown until this fails too.

 

[The Rabbi]

JFC what a clown car.

Yes the administration is completely clueless when it comes to understanding how our government works.

 

[bendog]

Fake Rabbi, the Senate has taken a House bill, and stripped it's language and put it's own in for decades. NOW it's suddenly and issue. You're clown

 

[The Rabbi]

Fake Rabbi, the Senate has taken a House bill, and stripped it's language and put it's own in for decades. NOW it's suddenly and issue. You're clown

No actually they havent and clearly you do not understand what is at stake here.
Do all spending bills have to originate in the House, yes or no?

 

[boilermaker55]

My, the republicans and tea party fools have a short memory. Don't they.
Once again, be foolish and it slaps you right in the face. Right republicans!

The Constitution is very clear that expenditures of public money can only be made pursuant to legislation originating in the House. Obama, the "Constitutional scholar" apparently failed to read that part before HHS started spending money on Obamacae subsidies that havent been authorizied by Congress.
So the House voted to sue Obama and his administration, charging them with violating their Constitutional roles.
Finally some action to rein in the most lawless administration in history.
There’s Yet Another Major Lawsuit That Some People Think Could Threaten Obamacare

 

[Dan Daly]

Fake Rabbi, the Senate has taken a House bill, and stripped it's language and put it's own in for decades. NOW it's suddenly and issue. You're clown

uh, no, they haven't, but thanks for letting me know that you are a card-carrying Idiocrat.

 

[depotoo]

My, my, how one tries to skew the truth with nothing but numbers. Care to inform why those that voted no chose that option what was buried in those bills? How much were those bills costing us, the tax payor, and where are the results from any of them visible?

My, the republicans and tea party fools have a short memory. Don't they.
Once again, be foolish and it slaps you right in the face. Right republicans!

The Constitution is very clear that expenditures of public money can only be made pursuant to legislation originating in the House. Obama, the "Constitutional scholar" apparently failed to read that part before HHS started spending money on Obamacae subsidies that havent been authorizied by Congress.
So the House voted to sue Obama and his administration, charging them with violating their Constitutional roles.
Finally some action to rein in the most lawless administration in history.
There’s Yet Another Major Lawsuit That Some People Think Could Threaten Obamacare

 

[bendog]

Fake Rabbi, the Senate has taken a House bill, and stripped it's language and put it's own in for decades. NOW it's suddenly and issue. You're clown

uh, no, they haven't, but thanks for letting me know that you are a card-carrying Idiocrat.

The plain language of the clause would seem to contradict the House's opinion, but the House relies on historical precedent and contemporaneous writings to support its position. In Federalist 66, for example, Alexander Hamilton writes, "The exclusive privilege of originating money bills will belong to the House of Representatives." This phrase could easily be construed to include taxing and spending. The Supreme Court has ruled, however, that the Senate can initiate bills that create revenue, if the revenue is incidental and not directly a tax. Most recently, in US v Munoz-Flores (495 US 385 [1990]), the Court said, "Because the bill at issue here was not one for raising revenue, it could not have been passed in violation of the Origination Clause." The case cites Twin City v Nebeker (176 US 196 [1897]), where the court said that "revenue bills are those that levy taxes, in the strict sense of the word."
http://www.usconstitution.net/constfaq_q125.html

go away child.

 

[Vigilante]

Fuck suing the bastard....

 

[Luddly Neddite]

More wasting the taxpayer's money with the goal of causing them harm.

Yep, that's Repubs, all righty.

And more of the usual lies about Obama.

 

[Dan Daly]

Fake Rabbi, the Senate has taken a House bill, and stripped it's language and put it's own in for decades. NOW it's suddenly and issue. You're clown

uh, no, they haven't, but thanks for letting me know that you are a card-carrying Idiocrat.

The plain language of the clause would seem to contradict the House's opinion, but the House relies on historical precedent and contemporaneous writings to support its position. In Federalist 66, for example, Alexander Hamilton writes, "The exclusive privilege of originating money bills will belong to the House of Representatives." This phrase could easily be construed to include taxing and spending. The Supreme Court has ruled, however, that the Senate can initiate bills that create revenue, if the revenue is incidental and not directly a tax. Most recently, in US v Munoz-Flores (495 US 385 [1990]), the Court said, "Because the bill at issue here was not one for raising revenue, it could not have been passed in violation of the Origination Clause." The case cites Twin City v Nebeker (176 US 196 [1897]), where the court said that "revenue bills are those that levy taxes, in the strict sense of the word."
http://www.usconstitution.net/constfaq_q125.html

go away child.

Another Idiocrat who doesn't understand how our government works.

FYI, since you at least attempt to do your homework...the Federalist papers are NOT our law, and I was responding to the even stupider post that the Senate rewrites House bills and makes them law all the time, which even a moron like you should know is not the case. Look up "conference" in case you are dumber than I give you credit for.

 

[Vigilante]

More wasting the taxpayer's money with the goal of causing them harm.

Yep, that's Repubs, all righty.

And more of the usual lies about Obama.

You are such an ignorant pig, Fugly!

 

[David_42]

Awesome, more hilarious attempts by the GOP nuts to take health insurance from millions of Americans.

 

[Care4all]

more wasting our tax dollars....it will not go in the House's favor, and if it did, then the insurance companies get paid after they sue for their money....or simply request it...

wasting another lawsuit with tax payer's money....

But even if they win the right to argue their case, the House Republicans' argument might be a lot more feeble than it looks, as David Super, a Georgetown University law professor, explained to me. By passing the Affordable Care Act and instructing the administration to pay insurers their subsidies, Super said, Congress effectively appropriated the funds to do it. "The Supreme Court has been very clear that you do not have to have a law that says 'appropriations' across the top. You just need a law directing that the money be spent," he said.
But there are even deeper reasons the case might not in fact be a very effective weapon against Obamacare. If the administration did lose at court, insurers would still be entitled to their subsidy payments under the law. Therefore, they could simply file their own suit against the federal government at the Court of Federal Claims and collect the money owed to them.
“Even if one imagines this case winning, which I have great difficulty imagining, the result would be that the insurers would have to take a few extra steps to get reimbursed, not that the money would not flow," Super said. "In cases like that, the courts have generally been pragmatic, and not required the filing of a lawsuit that everybody knows would win.”

 

[g5000]

The Constitution is very clear that expenditures of public money can only be made pursuant to legislation originating in the House. Obama, the "Constitutional scholar" apparently failed to read that part before HHS started spending money on Obamacae subsidies that havent been authorizied by Congress.
So the House voted to sue Obama and his administration, charging them with violating their Constitutional roles.
Finally some action to rein in the most lawless administration in history.
There’s Yet Another Major Lawsuit That Some People Think Could Threaten Obamacare

Another forced constitutional crisis the Republicans could easily have avoided. But they prefer to gum up the works and make life difficult for ordinary people instead, just to make yet another futile attempt to take down ObamaCare.

Jesus H. Christ.

There is a very simple fix to the problem, but oh hell no! Let's not allocate the money for the program we approved.

Same old tattered pattern.

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result.

 

[bendog]

For what it's worth, though it will fall of deaf ears of the perpetually enraged over Obamacare, which is not a constitutional watershed no matter what anyone has told you, here's a link to Prof Adler's analysis of the chances of an origination clause challenge. Adler btw was the intellectual champion of the fairly recent failure to hold Obamacare unconstitutional in Burwell and the insurance exchanges. That is, if Adler thinks a suit is going nowhere, proponents should be unhappy.

D.C. Circuit sidesteps origination clause challenge to Obamacare

But, not only did the senate observe the form, if not the spirit of the origination clause, there's nothing improper with the senate originating a bill that does a whole bunch of stuff like establishing exchanges, expanding Medicaid, mandating coverage and .... oh incidentally raising taxes to pay for it.