Common Cause has filed a lawsuit in a bizarre attempt to end the Senate practice of filibustering. The pro-regulation group partnered with Democratic Representatives John Lewis and Hank Johnson of Georgia, Michael Michaud of Maine and Keith Ellison of Minnesota, as well as three DREAM Act students as plaintiffs in the case.  Common Cause is using the suit to dredge up their displeasure over the failure of the DISCLOSE Act to pass in the Senate.

The complaint alleges that principle of majority rule is “so basic to the concept of a democratically elected legislative body that it did not need to be expressly stated in the Constitution.”

What is enshrined in the Constitution is Article I, Section 5.  This reads: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.”

Not only does this explicitly state that the responsible party for creating rules in the legislative branch happens to be the legislative branch, but it also provides an example of where simple majority rule on internal proceedings is insufficient.

Before filing such a frivolous suit, Common Cause would have been well served looking into something known as the Political Question Doctrine, which, in part, says: “the Supreme Court has held that federal courts should not hear cases which deal directly with issues that the Constitution makes the sole responsibility of the other branches of government.  Baker v Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962).”

Given the absurdity of the lawsuit, it’s hard to determine whether the Common Cause legal team has way too much or way too little time on their hands.