Authorization to Initiate Litigation for Actions By the President

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution. The constitutional question raised by this measure is whether the House has standing to sue the President over what is, in essence, a policy difference. ``Standing'' is a constitutionally-defined status and requires that the plaintiff, among other things, demonstrate a legally recognizable injury. In the case of a suit between branches of government, the House would also have to show that there is no other remedy.

On both of these counts, this lawsuit fails. The House cannot speak for the Senate, which doesn't agree with its position, and therefore cannot represent the legislative branch. Even if it could, neither body has suffered a recognizable injury merely because some Members of the Congress do not like how the President has interpreted a law passed by a different Congress.

Moreover, this Congress has a remedy if it doesn't like the way that the President has implemented the Affordable Care Act: it can change the law. That would be a far better approach, one more consistent with our separation of powers than this expensive and ill-conceived lawsuit.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source