![]() “In what rational universe is exercising the House appropriation power not a concrete injury?” he said.ĭemocrats seized on the fact that the first two lawyers appointed by House Republicans dropped the case. Turley argued the injury was the House being stripped of its fundamental power of the purse. The House was represented in court by Jonathan Turley of The George Washington University Law School.Ĭollyer interrupted him far less, though she did tell him, “You need a real injury,” meaning the House has to be harmed in order to have standing. McElvain claimed the money did not need to be appropriated separately and that it comes from permanent mandatory funds, a “pre-existing permanent appropriation.”īut Collyer responded by saying, “There was a request and the House said no money.” ![]() “I want to know where you find the appropriation,” Collyer pressed the administration. The House says it never appropriated the funds and it is unconstitutional for Obama to spend them. She focused on the payment question, which concerns a section of ObamaCare that makes payments to insurers to help cover low-income households’ expenses. “I just can’t decide whether that’s actually a fair statement,” she said. But the judge pressed McElvain on the substance, saying it was relevant to the standing question to see whether the dispute was abstract or whether there was a concrete issue harming the House.Ĭollyer said if the dispute really is abstract and generalized, “you’re probably right” that the House has no standing. McElvain repeatedly tried to stick to the issue of standing, noting that this preliminary stage is not about the substance of the case. She pressed McElvain on “why you think this just an abstract issue of law.” Bush, on Thursday held a preliminary hearing to determine if the House has legal standing to bring its arguments in court.Īdministration lawyer Joel McElvain argued the issue is a “generalized” dispute and there is no particular harm to the House, meaning lawmakers have no standing to sue.īut Collyer interrupted this argument at the beginning of the hearing to ask, “You don’t really think that?” The lawsuit argues that Obama is spending certain funds under the healthcare law even though Congress has not appropriated them, and that the administration unconstitutionally delayed the mandate for employers to provide health insurance.īoth sides agree the suit is unprecedented: The House says it has never before had to defend its power of the purse in court, and the administration says the House has never tried to win a political dispute between branches of government in court.įederal District Judge Rosemary Collyer, an appointee of former President George W. ![]() Republicans have charged that Obama is flouting the law on a wide range of issues, and behind Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) sued specifically over the White House’s actions related to ObamaCare. ![]() A federal judge on Thursday appeared skeptical of the Obama administration’s call to dismiss a lawsuit from House Republicans challenging President Obama’s use of executive power. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |