By Scott W. Winchell
Yesterday we witnessed a seminal moment take place in the House of Representatives that all Americans need to take seriously. We are at a critical point defined best as a Constitutional Crisis because the rule-of-law is being replaced by the rule-of-man, the definition of tyranny.
As Congressmen Trey Gowdy (R-SC) states in the videos below, we need to look at what is happening minus the labels of party and ideology. The issue at hand; the “ENFORCE The Law Act of 2014,” seeks to give the House ‘standing’ before the courts to defend its powers as assigned by our founders in the Constitution.
To defend these powers from being usurped by another branch of the government in our co-equal, three-branch system of governance is of the utmost importance for all Representatives and Senators. After all, they are the voice of the people in the House, and the voice of the several states in the Senate. Our voice should never be diminished by an executive.
Congressman Trey Gowdy, R-SC, defends his bill.
In his ‘Floor Speech’ he cites instances where the President, a Senator at the time, made statements about the previous administration’s so-called grab for power.
In those statements, then Senator Obama called upon the courts for remedy to stop the perceived power-grab of the Bush Administration.
Now that he is President, there is an obvious leap in the opposite direction and the House seeks to force the President to “faithfully execute the laws” he swore to uphold and defend.
The IJReview said this:
We’ve finally gotten to the point where Congress had to pass a law to make sure that the laws they pass are enforced.
In a speech that Representative Trey Gowdy really shouldn’t have had to make, he explains angrily to the Congress what its job is, and to Obama what his job is. Members were heard to applaud as he reached the crescendo.
Five Democrats joined Republicans in passing a bill that directs Obama to follows the laws – clearing the House by a 233 to 181 vote.
Now the White House is vowing to veto the bill should it pass the Senate on the same grounds. They claim it usurps the power of the Executive branch. This adds up to a Constitutional Crisis indeed. However, we at SUA do not believe for one moment that the Senate will pass it, but the ‘bell has been rung.’
Whatever Harry Reid does now will likely only varnish his reputation for being the worst Majority Leader of the Senate in modern times in terms of constitutionality, class, ethics, professionalism, and esprit de corps of the once most ‘deliberative body on the planet.’
Bridget Johnson at PJ Media wrote the following:
The White House issued veto threats on Wednesday for a pair of bills reining in executive overreach that debuted and were debated on the House floor.
The Executive Needs to Faithfully Observe and Respect Congressional Enactments of the Law (ENFORCE the Law) Act of 2014 puts in place a procedure that would expedite the ability of the House or Senate to sue the executive branch for failure to faithfully execute the laws.
Obama Delivers his 2014 State of the Union Speech
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a former prosecutor who introduced the bill, said a three-judge panel at the federal district court level followed by direct appeal to the Supreme Court is necessary so that the president can’t stall litigation until his term is up.
The Office of Management and Budget said in the veto threat that it “strongly opposes” the bill “because it violates the separation of powers by purporting to permit the Congress to challenge in court the exercise by the President of one of his core constitutional functions – taking care that Federal laws are faithfully executed.”
“Congress ordinarily has the power to define the bounds of the Executive Branch’s enforcement authority under particular statutes, and persons who claim to be harmed by the Executive Branch’s actions may challenge them as inconsistent with the governing statute,” the veto threat continues.
“But the power the bill purports to assign to Congress to sue the President over whether he has properly discharged his constitutional obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed exceeds constitutional limitations. Congress may not assign such power to itself, nor may it assign to the courts the task of resolving such generalized political disputes.” (Read the rest here.)
Please read the rest of her great article, but as is sometimes best, watch the videos and judge for yourself. There are two speeches to watch, the first is his introduction, and the second is his defense of the bill. Both are around five minutes long, but it is a great ten minutes total that explains in clear language what the problems are, and what the remedy is according to his seasoned, experienced view as a former prosecutor.
More from Bridget Johnson at PJ Media:
On the House floor, Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said the intent of Gowdy’s bill is to “abolish the powers of the presidency because you disagree with policy.”
Isn’t it ironic, that the Representative from Texas describes Gowdy’s Bill in such a way yet she is the one who thinks the Constitution is 400 years old. (From the Free Beacon)
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D., Texas) declared the U.S. Constitution to be 400 years old Wednesday on the House floor, which would mean it was signed in 1614.
“Maybe I should offer a good thanks to the distinguished members of the majority, the Republicans, my chairman and others, for giving us an opportunity to have a deliberative constitutional discussion that reinforces the sanctity of this nation and how well it is that we have lasted some 400 years, operating under a constitution that clearly defines what is constitutional and what is not,” she said.
That would be seven years after Jamestown, Virginia became America’s first permanent English settlement.
We at SUA stand firmly along side constitutional scholars like Rep. Gowdy and hang our heads every time Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee tries to educate us. Texas must be very proud.
Rep. Gowdy’s Floor Speech on the ENFORCE the Law Act
%CODE%
The second speech ends on a note about what we pointed out after the 2014 State of the Union speech last month where the Democrats cheered as Obama said:
But America does not stand still, and neither will I. (Applause.) So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do. (Cheers, applause.)
Gowdy, and strict constitutionalists like SUA agree, it was unconscionable of the Democrats who rose and cheered as the President told them he intended to go around them. Why would they cheer about losing more of the co-equal branch’s power to the Executive?
Rep. Gowdy’s Defense of the ENFORCE the Law Act
%CODE2%
