Republicans challenge Obama's executive actions, file lawsuit over Obamacare House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) on Friday fired twin salvos at President Obama's recent executive actions, announcing a House lawsuit challenging the implementation of the 2010 health-care law and vowing to counter Obama's move to provide relief to millions of illegal immigrants with legislative action. In a clearly coordinated campaign against what Republicans have labeled as Obama's "imperial presidency," Boehner announced the filing of the lawsuit minutes after he publicly denounced Obama's executive action on immigration. And later in the day, the first legislative hearing on the immigration order was scheduled. "If this president can get away with making his own laws, future presidents will have the ability to as well," Boehner said in a statement. The House has an obligation to stand up for the Constitution, and that is exactly why we are pursuing this course of action. The suit, which was approved by House Republicans four months ago, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the federal courthouse where most battles between the executive and legislative branches get resolved. It will be led by Jonathan Turley, a law professor at the George Washington University Law School, who is the third legal adviser to handle the case. Two other law firms had been hired to take the case but later dropped it, with Republicans saying they had received political pressure from partners to bow out and Democrats charging that the case has no constitutional merits. President Obama announced new action to delay the deportation of about 4 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. Here are some numbers to know about immigration. Republicans are focusing on Obama's move to delay portions of the law that mandated larger employers offer health coverage for their full-time employees or face certain tax penalties. As the rollout of the law became increasingly chaotic in 2013, Obama issued an order to delay portions of the mandate. The suit also alleges that the administration planned to illegally planned to pay an estimated $175 billion over the next decade, in addition to $3 billion already paid this past year, to insurance companies, even though Congress hasn't provided that money. Now, in their challenge on executive actions, the House GOP is confronting Obama for altering that portion of the law. In recent weeks, some Republicans have pushed for including the immigration order in the lawsuit against the president, but that is not the case for now. Instead, Boehner promised action in the House to counter Obama's plans. "We're working with our members and looking at the options available to us, but I will say to you the House will, in fact, act," Boehner told reporters Friday morning in the first televised Republican rebuttal to Obama's prime-time address Thursday night. Boehner declined to spell out exactly how Republicans would counter the immigration executive actions, which extend protections to roughly 4 million undocumented parents of legal U.S. citizens and young immigrants brought here illegally when they were children. Later in the day, the House Homeland Security Committee announced plans to hold a hearing in response to Obama's executive action. The panel said it will meet on Dec. 3 to hear testimony from Homeland Security Secretary Jeh C. Johnson, who helped formulate Obama's plans and deeply explored the legal justifications for the president's actions. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), who chairs the panel and has worked for several years on border security matters, said he plans to use "every tool at my disposal to stop the president's unconstitutional actions from being implemented, starting with this oversight hearing." He added that Johnson "will have the opportunity to answer the American people's questions, including how DHS will secure our border and prevent additional illegal immigration." At his news conference, Boehner dodged a question about the assertion by one of his own leadership team members, House Appropriations Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.), that there was little Congress could do to restrict funding for the new program. Rogers and his staff said Thursday that funding for the implementation of the new policy does not come from the annual spending bills approved by Congress but instead comes from border fees, placing it outside the reach of congressional Republicans. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), a leading opponent of the president's action and likely incoming chairman of the budget committee, told reporters Thursday that he would support attaching a policy rider onto the government funding bills that simply forbid the federal workforce from implementing the new rules on immigration. Speaking Friday at the Heritage Foundation, Sessions said such action was necessary because Obama "granted amnesty to five million people, and he did it by basically saying, "I'm not going to enforce the laws of the United States of America." He ignored the interests of the American people, the American workers, recent immigrants who have been here and are looking for jobs in a time of unemployment. He undermined, in my view, the moral integrity of immigration law. And even the constitutional separation of powers. You have to have integrity and consistency in law enforcement if you want to be able to defend what you have done. Sessions is leading the effort to keep government funding on a short leash in the new year, when Republicans take over the Senate and control both chambers of Congress, making it easier to get clear majorities for his preferred line of attack. Sessions dismissed the immigration reform bill the Senate passed last year, saying: "politicians will pass anything that sounds good about immigration as long as it doesn't change anything, as long as it won't work." The Gang of Eight bill, the comprehensive bill that they put forward, had the best talking points. I one time said, "I'm for the talking points, let's vote on them." But when you read the fine print it wasn't there," he said. It was another piece of legislation that was actually capable of letting the illegality to continue in the interest of certain powerful forces to be rewarded. Limiting funding would require a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate, and it would almost certainly draw a veto from Obama, which, critics say, would lead to a possible shutdown of some federal agencies. Boehner deflected those questions and instead blamed Obama for issuing too many executive orders to modify the controversial new health law that took effect over the last year, which left his rank-and-file Republicans unwilling to trust the president and refusing to even consider a broad rewrite of immigration laws. "He created an environment where the members could not trust him, and trying to find a way to work together was virtually impossible, and I had warned the president over and over that his actions were making it impossible for me to do what he wanted me to do," the speaker said, explaining his inability to even consider smaller pieces of the 2013 Senate-approved legislation that revamped border and immigration laws. "We have a broken immigration system, and the American people expect us to work together to fix it, and we ought to do it through the democratic process," he said. Conservatives inside and outside Congress want to use the budget process as a battleground to wage war against Obama and his immigration program. In a floor speech Thursday, soon-to-be Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) suggested that his preference would be for Republicans to avoid becoming mired in a fiscal clash during the lame-duck session, shortly before the GOP takes control of the Senate in January. Many conservative lawmakers are shrugging off those pleas, however. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said Wednesday that Obama's executive action should be met with a refusal to vote on any more of his nominees, and on Thursday, he compared the action to the ancient Catiline conspiracy, a plot to overthrow the Roman Republic. Robert Costa and Ed O'Keefe contributed to this report.