Friday, December 13, 2013

Rep. Tom Rice: Resolution Would Allow Him to Take President to Court

Rep. Tom Rice: Resolution Would Allow Him to Take President to Court

Friday, 13 Dec 2013 10:01 PM
Share:
More . . .
A    A   |
   Email Us   |
   Print   |
Rep. Tom Rice — the South Carolina lawmaker who's drafted a resolution to take President Barack Obama to court for tweaking the Affordable Care Act without congressional approval — says he wants to serve the commander-in-chief notice that he can't selectively enforce the law.

"The resolution just requires a vote of the House, it doesn't even require a vote of the Senate … to bring a lawsuit against the president for violation of Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution, which requires that he take care to faithfully execute the laws of the land," Rice, a Republican, told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.

Story continues below video.



"He can't pick and choose which laws he wants to enforce. He has to enforce all of the laws," Rice said.

Obama roiled many Republicans when he delayed the employer mandate for a year and made other changes to the healthcare law without first seeking approval on Capitol Hill.

"The president is someone who will continue to press until he finds the line, and we're going to try to push back a little bit," Rice said.

"I don't think it's a slam dunk either way, but the legal experts that I conferred with before I did this — and I've been working on this for months — came to the conclusion that this is a legitimate question for the courts …"

"Many of the steps the president has taken are certainly outside of his authority. Things like extending, unilaterally, the employer mandate for a year, things like allowing the 'substandard insurance policies' to continue to be issued for a year …"

He said House action against a president is not unprecedented.

"The House has brought institutional suits to enforce subpoenas where the executive branch has ignored subpoenas in the past," he said.

"It was determined in those cases that we had what's called institutional standing. There's never been a case like this, and we're looking forward to prosecuting it.''

No comments:

Post a Comment