Best part of Boehner lawsuit nobody has discussed...

[jberryhill]

Never mind that it will die an early death on preliminary motions, there is an unanticipated thing which will happen.

Wait until you see the motions to join.

All of the wild and wooly "legal scholars" of the far right are going to want to hitch a ride on this wagon,

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. I have been gleeful about it all day....

this is a political goldmine....and comedy gold too!

I can guarantee you John Stewart and Stephen Colbert are dancing like lunatics at this news...

[jberryhill]

5. Yeah that's the other joke unmentioned

Monetary damages are out, so we're looking at some form of injunctive or declaratory relief. There's no basis to proceed on what would be a purely pointless declaratory judgment, so....

1. An order for immediate enforcement of the business mandate?

2. A broad injunction that the president is "prohibited from unconstitutional comduct"?

I have no idea what is appropriate to the claim they are making, which, as you point out, is a real head scratcher here.

Frankly, our dear Laser Haas made more sense than this.

[Marie Marie]

2. Even Obama seemed to be having a good time talking about it.

He looked genuinely amused at the absurdity of it.

[NightWatcher]

3. Crazy question: what remedy are they seeking?

What is the legal goal of the suit, a fine?

[madville]

4. They know nothing will come of it

They are throwing their base a bone to gnaw on before the midterms.

[jberryhill]

8. It's a very good question

And it's a puzzling point that no one seems to be discussing.

That's okay for the GOP base, which has only the dimmest notion of what constitutes a legal claim in the first place.

And then there are probably some that think it is a ticket to a discovery fishing expedition, which was the point of the Paula Jones suit. But the problem is that judgment on the pleadings - some species of Rule 12 motion, will make quick work of this thing.

We'll have to see this thing when it is drafted.

[NightWatcher]

9. Do they even have standing?

I'm lazy and refuse to read or brief this one.

[jberryhill]

10. no, and they have their own constitutional remedy

[npk]

6. When will Judge Judy hear the case?

Anybody know?

[JaneyVee]

7. A political party so devoid of any ideas/solutions

Has no choice but to sue the prez. Hate is the only thing that energizes their base.

[Rex]

11. They are unbelievable, how any of them function in normal society is beyond me.

I think what they like most about each other is their hatred for all living things. They are like a living breathing Legion of Doom that spends all days in the muck trying to decide how to fuck up the nation.

[conservaphobe]

12. Didn't know about that.

This has the potential to be epic.

[Old Codger]

13. It is a fail

Any judge who hears any part of this and follows the law will throw it out. In order to sue someone you have to have a reason based on "harm" or "damage" you have suffered because of the actions you are suing for. The house does not have "standing" in this case therefore they have no real basis for a lawsuit... it should in fact be DOA... but I am sure they will find some judge that is just as stupid and corrupt as they are and possibly will allow it to get into the giggles stage before it is laughed out of court...