We can still stop the Iranian nuke pact by bipartisan, bicameral litigation

Congress has until Thursday night to sue President Obama.  The House will apparently lead the charge.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said a lawsuit “is very possible.”  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will revisit the issue legislatively.

Meanwhile, revelation of fatal faults in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) accumulate (e.g., Iran’s missile program would become exempt).

Litigation was presaged by the September 10 vote by the House affirming that incomplete disclosure of inspection-documents – exposed by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and confirmed by the Associated Press – voided the Corker-Cardin Act.

The wisdom of ignoring the administration’s claim that it does not possess them was confirmed when Business Insider publicized an e-mail received from former IAEA deputy director-general Olli Heinonen.  The media have ignored the fact that the United States, as an IAEA board member, can seek release of the secret documents: "If a board-member asks [for] it and others resist the distribution … this can be overcome by a vote[.] … [A s]imple majority is enough, and no vetoes exist in the IAEA system."

This author’s prior articles specified the rationale for efforts to block this “treaty” and the method to preclude filibusters by invoking the Senate’s “nuclear option.”  This author anticipated in May that such conflict between two governmental branches would have to be adjudicated.

As a result, Boehner can optimize a legal challenge by recalling two Obamacare-related legal precedents:

  1. On September 9, a federal court gave the House “standing” to challenge Obama’s implementation of Obamacare by citing Congress’s constitutionally provided mandate and rejecting exercise of presidential fiat.

Because neither the JCPOA nor the act contains a “severability” clause, the entire act must be applied to the entire JCPOA.  Anything contradictory or inapplicable when comparing them voids approving the JCPOA by employing the act.

Congress can contest the JCPOA, claiming executive overreach.

  1. Last June, the Supreme Court gave Obama the ability to maintain federal and state “exchanges” by invoking its interpretation of “congressional intent” and ignoring explicit statutory language.

The administration constantly reassured the public, as recently as to Congress up to one week prior to July 14 – when the JCPOA was signed – that an agreement would not extend to non-nuclear weaponry.  The JCPOA is contradictory, voiding U.N. Security Council Resolution 1929 (encompassing ballistic missiles) contingent upon satisfying certain interim requirements, and Iran and Russia are already exploring arms sales (undoubtedly targeting America and her traditional allies).

Congress can contest the act, claiming adoption under false pretenses.

Therefore, the House must pass a resolution authorizing Speaker Boehner to file a lawsuit that claims that Corker-Cardin was not fulfilled (due to the absence of complete disclosure) and, thus, that the 60-day deadline has not started.  The Senate must superimpose its claim that the JCPOA’s status as a “treaty” cannot be overridden by legislation (the act).  Both must claim that “damages” arose after Obama precluded their discharging their oversight responsibilities.

The House voted against “approval” rather than addressing a “disapproval” resolution, as had been advised in sequential essays by former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy.  His most recent pieces invoked efforts by Sen. Cruz to derail the JCPOA by targeting bankers, and he concluded that Sen. McConnell must advocate passage of a resolution declaring that Obama’s default renders the Corker review process moot.

These actions are embodied in the Gohmert Resolution (#410), which recognizes that the JCPOA should have been submitted as a treaty and, thus, have become subject to the Senate’s “advise and consent” role.  Their rationale is reflected in the observation by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) that permitting release by global financial institutions of approximately $150 billion would yield America becoming the number-one funder of global terrorism.

Deroy Murdock, another author at National Review’s “Corner,” concurred: “Mitch McConnell Should Follow House’s Lead on Obama-Nuke Deal.”  That the Senate rejected, in April, treating a generic nuclear pact as a treaty cannot serve as a negative precedent because the specific text of the JCPOA had not yet been released.

Until now, Obama has controlled the daily political talking-points, channeling the successful modus operandi of James Carville when he ran Bill Clinton’s “War Room” in 1992.  Obama intentionally allowed Iran to shorten the nuclear breakout time so that he can now essentially argue – as he could not a half-decade ago – that “no deal is worse than a bad deal.”

The GOP-controlled Congress must answer Obama’s polemics.

Obama’s historic campaign to strengthen Iran must be countered (1) by seizing back the legislative authority and the narrative; (2) by sculpting a bipartisan-bicameral lawsuit against an imperial presidency; and (3) by honoring overwhelming public sentiment against capitulating to the mullahs.

Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. is a political activist.  Hyperlinks to documentation of these assertions may be acquired either by consulting the version of this op-ed uploaded onto the Internet or by contacting the author at rsklaroff@gmail.com.

Congress has until Thursday night to sue President Obama.  The House will apparently lead the charge.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said a lawsuit “is very possible.”  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) will revisit the issue legislatively.

Meanwhile, revelation of fatal faults in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) accumulate (e.g., Iran’s missile program would become exempt).

Litigation was presaged by the September 10 vote by the House affirming that incomplete disclosure of inspection-documents – exposed by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) and confirmed by the Associated Press – voided the Corker-Cardin Act.

The wisdom of ignoring the administration’s claim that it does not possess them was confirmed when Business Insider publicized an e-mail received from former IAEA deputy director-general Olli Heinonen.  The media have ignored the fact that the United States, as an IAEA board member, can seek release of the secret documents: "If a board-member asks [for] it and others resist the distribution … this can be overcome by a vote[.] … [A s]imple majority is enough, and no vetoes exist in the IAEA system."

This author’s prior articles specified the rationale for efforts to block this “treaty” and the method to preclude filibusters by invoking the Senate’s “nuclear option.”  This author anticipated in May that such conflict between two governmental branches would have to be adjudicated.

As a result, Boehner can optimize a legal challenge by recalling two Obamacare-related legal precedents:

  1. On September 9, a federal court gave the House “standing” to challenge Obama’s implementation of Obamacare by citing Congress’s constitutionally provided mandate and rejecting exercise of presidential fiat.

Because neither the JCPOA nor the act contains a “severability” clause, the entire act must be applied to the entire JCPOA.  Anything contradictory or inapplicable when comparing them voids approving the JCPOA by employing the act.

Congress can contest the JCPOA, claiming executive overreach.

  1. Last June, the Supreme Court gave Obama the ability to maintain federal and state “exchanges” by invoking its interpretation of “congressional intent” and ignoring explicit statutory language.

The administration constantly reassured the public, as recently as to Congress up to one week prior to July 14 – when the JCPOA was signed – that an agreement would not extend to non-nuclear weaponry.  The JCPOA is contradictory, voiding U.N. Security Council Resolution 1929 (encompassing ballistic missiles) contingent upon satisfying certain interim requirements, and Iran and Russia are already exploring arms sales (undoubtedly targeting America and her traditional allies).

Congress can contest the act, claiming adoption under false pretenses.

Therefore, the House must pass a resolution authorizing Speaker Boehner to file a lawsuit that claims that Corker-Cardin was not fulfilled (due to the absence of complete disclosure) and, thus, that the 60-day deadline has not started.  The Senate must superimpose its claim that the JCPOA’s status as a “treaty” cannot be overridden by legislation (the act).  Both must claim that “damages” arose after Obama precluded their discharging their oversight responsibilities.

The House voted against “approval” rather than addressing a “disapproval” resolution, as had been advised in sequential essays by former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy.  His most recent pieces invoked efforts by Sen. Cruz to derail the JCPOA by targeting bankers, and he concluded that Sen. McConnell must advocate passage of a resolution declaring that Obama’s default renders the Corker review process moot.

These actions are embodied in the Gohmert Resolution (#410), which recognizes that the JCPOA should have been submitted as a treaty and, thus, have become subject to the Senate’s “advise and consent” role.  Their rationale is reflected in the observation by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) that permitting release by global financial institutions of approximately $150 billion would yield America becoming the number-one funder of global terrorism.

Deroy Murdock, another author at National Review’s “Corner,” concurred: “Mitch McConnell Should Follow House’s Lead on Obama-Nuke Deal.”  That the Senate rejected, in April, treating a generic nuclear pact as a treaty cannot serve as a negative precedent because the specific text of the JCPOA had not yet been released.

Until now, Obama has controlled the daily political talking-points, channeling the successful modus operandi of James Carville when he ran Bill Clinton’s “War Room” in 1992.  Obama intentionally allowed Iran to shorten the nuclear breakout time so that he can now essentially argue – as he could not a half-decade ago – that “no deal is worse than a bad deal.”

The GOP-controlled Congress must answer Obama’s polemics.

Obama’s historic campaign to strengthen Iran must be countered (1) by seizing back the legislative authority and the narrative; (2) by sculpting a bipartisan-bicameral lawsuit against an imperial presidency; and (3) by honoring overwhelming public sentiment against capitulating to the mullahs.

Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. is a political activist.  Hyperlinks to documentation of these assertions may be acquired either by consulting the version of this op-ed uploaded onto the Internet or by contacting the author at rsklaroff@gmail.com.