President Barack Hussein Obama regularly breaks statutory laws and violates the supreme law of the land, i.e the United States Constitution.
Whether its his EPA’s bureaucratic promulgation of draconian regs in the War on Coal, and cheap energy for the poor generally; defying court orders ending deep water-oil drilling moratoriums; or special Obamacare exemptions for Capitol Hill staffs and Congress. In short, he is a criminal. But unlike in the days of Watergate when a member of President Nixon’s own party asked – “What did the president know, and when did he know it? – there are no Howard Bakers in the today’s Democratic Party.
So as long as there are at least 34 Democrats in the Senate, much less their current ruling majority, President Obama could’t be impeached even if he had droned Duck Dynasty before A&E did.
A group of Republican House members, led by South Carolina’s Tom Rice (see opposing shutdown below) have had enough though, but instead of seeking impeachment, they want to take the Obama Administration to court:
[Rice-R-SC] … is sponsoring a resolution in the House of Representatives that would, if adopted, direct the legislative body “to bring a civil action for declaratory or injunctive relief to challenge certain policies and actions taken by the executive branch.” In other words, Rep. Rice wants to take President Obama to court for not faithfully executing the laws.
“President Obama has adopted a practice of picking and choosing which laws he wants to enforce. In most cases, his laws of choice conveniently coincide with his Administration’s political agenda. Our Founding Fathers created the Executive Branch to implement and enforce the laws written by Congress and vested this power in the President. However, President Obama has chosen to ignore some of the laws written by Congress and implemented by preceding Presidents,” Rice wrote in a letter to fellow House members to ask them to co-sponsor this resolution.
“This resolution allows the House of Representatives to bring legal action against the Executive Branch and challenge recent actions, inactions, and policies.”
The “legal action against the President” would be, according to an aide for Rep. Rice, “for ignoring Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution.” Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution states,…”he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed...”
We do not oppose asking the court to rule on such matters but suspect they will likely refuse to hear the challenges or rule them “political questions” or within the Chief Executive’s “prosecutorial discretion”.
But clearly, President Obama does not “faithfully execute the laws”.
A bi-partisan impeachment would be fine as well; but we think the better way to repudiate an inexplicably re-elected rogue now exposed as a miserable failure in a job too big for him, is by the American people at ballot boxes in. In 2014, by returning a larger GOP majority to the House and replacing the Dems in the Senate with a Republican majority there. And in 2016 by rejecting whichever nominee they choose as the standard bearer of the radical liberal party the Democrats have become.