Providing for Consideration of H. Res. Authorizing the Speaker to Appear As Amicus Curiae on Behalf of the House
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the rule and the underlying resolution.
I disagree with the gentlewoman from New York. This is not about politics. This is about the Constitution of the United States. And it is very clear. It says the President ``shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.''
Now, some people may argue about what that may mean. But in 1792, President Washington, who was the chair of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, wrote this:
``It is my duty to see the Laws executed--to permit them to be trampled upon with impunity would be repugnant to'' my duty.
Fast forward to 2010. In response to those arguing for executive amnesty at that time, President Obama himself stated:
I am President. I am not king. There's a limit to the discretion that I can show because I'm obliged to execute the law. I can't just make the laws up myself.
Six months later, the President went further. He said this:
There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply, through executive order, ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.
Unfortunately, in 2012, President Obama reversed course and unilaterally imposed a massive program of executive amnesty in violation of this country's immigration laws. In 2014, he doubled down with a second, more expansive executive amnesty program.
According to an analysis by the Migration Policy Institute, 87 percent of all illegal aliens will be exempted from immigration enforcement actions under this President's amnesty policies. Thus, immigration laws, as actually written by Congress, will apply to a mere 13 percent of violators.
In the upcoming case of the United States v. Texas, the Court will consider whether the President's executive amnesty violated the Constitution. Consequently, that case has the potential to be one of the most important constitutional decisions on executive power ever decided.
This resolution authorizes the filing of an amicus brief on behalf of this House in legal opposition to the President's unconstitutional actions.
As a lawyer, I can tell you amicus filings are important. They allow the court to obtain information and arguments from nonparties who have an important bearing on this case.
This resolution will allow this body to be heard before the Supreme Court.
This is not about immigration policy. This is about ensuring that this President and future Presidents, regardless of their political party, do not have the authority to ignore or change the laws through executive fiat. Ultimately, this is about the Constitution and protecting the rule of law.
I urge my colleagues to support this rule and this important resolution.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source