‘There’s a perfectly acceptable remedy right there in the Constitution that’s bloodless’
Judge Andrew Napolitano
Fox News Channel Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano is unimpressed by states suing the federal government over President Obama unilaterally changing immigration laws or by House Republicans pushing legislation to forbid Obama from moving forward in implementing his policies.
Napolitano, who has a weekly column at WND, is also not urging lawmakers to defund enforcement of what many on the right consider amnesty. Instead, the former New Jersey Superior Court judge thinks Obama’s actions warrant his removal from office.
Earlier this week, 17 states, led by Texas Attorney General and Governor-Elect Greg Abbott, filed suit against the federal government. Napolitano said that’s not going to get the job done.
“They can file all the lawsuits they want and the court is going to say, ‘Tell your client, Mr. Boehner, tell your client, Senator McConnell, that there’s a perfectly acceptable remedy right there in the Constitution that’s bloodless, and they can do it by taking a couple of votes,” Napolitano said. “It’s called impeachment.’”
Republicans from leadership to moderates to the most rock-ribbed conservatives have all dismissed any speculation about impeachment since they clearly don’t have the votes to convict Obama in the Senate and they believe it will backfire politically heading into 2016. Nonetheless, Napolitano finds that GOP position baffling.
“For some bizarre reason that I have yet to understand, the Republican leadership in Washington believes that if they file articles of impeachment, this is going to elect Hillary president,” he said. “What? That’s a disconnect to me.”
On Thursday, the House approved legislation authored by Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla., that forbids Obama from implementing any unilateral changes to immigration law. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., vows the bill will never reach the Senate floor on his watch. Napolitano believes the bill would never achieve its desired effect.
“They could enact a statute that says all these executive orders are illegal and no one’s to obey them,” he said. “The president could veto that. Let’s say they have enough votes to override his veto. They don’t, but let’s say they do. Let’s say they override the veto and the statute becomes law without the president’s signature. He’s not going to obey that statute. He doesn’t obey the laws that were in existence at the time he took an oath to enforce them faithfully. He’s certainly not going to obey a statute that was written in order to regulate his behavior when he’s already decided that his behavior is going to be the opposite of it.”
Napolitano said the case for Obama acting unconstitutionally is very clear.
“We have a lawless president who is saying to five million people, ‘You want to stay here? Do A,B,C,D and E.’ Where did the A,B,C,D and E come from? He made them up,” he said. “They’re not even in the statute as it now exist.”
Written by GREG COROMBOS
Read more at WND