[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 7]
[House]
[Page 10107]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       THERE GOES THE RULE OF LAW

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Gohmert) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments of my friend from 
Texas. We do have some disagreements, but I want to go back to the 
issue of jobs.
  People are hurting. Without jobs, the unemployment has been higher 
than the President said it would ever get if we would just simply give 
him about a trillion dollars to give away to his friends, that that 
would make it all better. Well, it didn't.
  What we've seen over and over from this administration is a complete 
disregard for the rule of law. When you look at all the people who have 
been drawn into this country illegally, in violation of our immigration 
laws--even though there is no country in the world that allows the 
immigration that this country does and the wide open gates that we do. 
But we do have parameters.
  We've been told there may be a billion, billion and a half people who 
want to come to this country. If they did all at once, they would 
overwhelm us, and there would be no country for others to come to.
  Why do so many want to come here? It's because we've always had 
regard for the rule of law. When there were those who would ignore the 
rule of law and put partisan and personal benefit above the law, 
eventually they had to account. Some have gotten away, but this country 
has done a better job of being fair across the board than any other 
country in history. That's why so many want to come here, because we've 
had more jobs, a better economy, and made more advancements than any 
country in history.
  Yet, on the issue of immigration, this President stands up and 
announces we're going to ignore the law, just as he did on marriage. 
There is a proper law that was signed into law by President Bill 
Clinton, enacted by Congress, upheld, and he says we're going to ignore 
that because we don't like it. There goes the rule of law.
  When it comes to ObamaCare, we've passed this law. But you know what? 
So many of the people that pushed this through and rammed it down the 
throats of America, they're asking for waivers and they're good 
friends, so we're going to give them waivers so they can ignore the 
rule of law.
  How about the auto bailout? Ignored. The bankruptcy law? It ignored 
the Constitution and took away dealerships and gave them to others. 
This was a place where the rule of law was completely ignored.
  Then this President stands up and says: Not only are we going to 
ignore the rule of law, duly passed law, but as I speak, I will create 
law. I now speak into effect new work visas and work permits that have 
never existed. But just as the ancient pharaohs or the leaders of the 
ancient world, as I speak, so it must be. I'm speaking into effect new 
work permits. I'm speaking into effect an ignoring of the laws that 
were duly passed. I'm speaking into effect a chance to give them jobs 
that Americans are hurting and trying to get.
  We also have an Attorney General who was not only asked about Fast 
and Furious, he was asked about Justice Kagan on the Supreme Court: Are 
you aware of any instances during Justice Kagan's tenure as Solicitor 
General of the United States in which information related to patient 
protection and affordable care and/or litigation related thereto was 
related or provided? He refused to answer.
  When did your staff begin removing Solicitor General Kagan from 
meetings in this matter? On what basis did you take this action? On 
what other matters was such action taken?

                              {time}  1100

  Look, the rule of law required that when it turned out there were 
possibly thousands of abuses of the national security letter in a 
Republican administration, I picked up the phone, called the chief of 
staff of my President, and said, This is unforgivable. We need a new 
Attorney General. Where is my friend across the aisle who will step up 
and say, the rule of law is too important?
  We have Justice Kagan, who is ignoring law 28 U.S.C. 455 that says, 
You must disqualify yourself in any case in which your impartiality 
might reasonably be questioned. It must be reasonably expected that 
either she ignored the law, did not do her job as Solicitor General, 
was totally negligent, or she did her job, and she should not have sat 
on this case. She should have disqualified.
  I beg and plead for my colleagues across the aisle to step up, as I 
did when the Attorney General was responsible for presiding over an 
injustice, and call for her resignation. It is contemptuous of 
Congress.

                          ____________________