Reinterpreting his oath to “support and defend” the Constitution as a vow to subvert and disdain it, Barack Obama plans to announce this evening his executive order on illegal immigration, essentially renouncing Rule of Law and paving the way for millions of illegal aliens to escape deportation and be rewarded for their law-breaking. The president’s infamous pen is poised to make the executive order official Friday. It’s fitting that he’ll place his bet in Las Vegas.

Already, congressional Republicans, empowered by their recent election win, have a plan to stop the president’s unconstitutional breach of executive power and once and for all stand courageously for Rule of Law and our nation’s legislative process.

Or, maybe not quite.

Instead, GOP leaders have come up with a questionable idea to borrow from Jonathan Gruber’s playbook and capitalize on the “stupidity of the America voter.” The strategy would be to make it appear as if congressional Republicans are standing up against the president’s plan when, in fact, they are funding it.

It all comes down to that little “r” word: rescission, the process by which Congress revokes funding previously authorized through the legislative process.

Under the rescission approach, Republicans would pass an appropriations bill to continue funding the government – hardly an unusual occurrence. However, this bill would include funding for the president’s amnesty plan. Then, after the fact, Congress would pass a bill revoking said funding.

To quote the eloquent words of National Review’s Quin Hillyer, “This is sheer and utter nonsense. Balderdash. Tommyrot.”

You see, all that’s needed to override a rescission vote is a presidential veto. And if you think Barack Obama might miss an opportunity to veto a bill pulling funding from his amnesty plan, then perhaps Gruber was right in his evaluation of voters.

So why is the GOP seemingly intent on this fool’s errand? Because the other options may actually require a confrontation Republicans aren’t willing to face as they dance with public opinion. And, it’s important to note, they don’t yet control the Senate.

But there are other options. As Josh Siegel of The Daily Signal points out, the GOP could “[p]ass two separate funding bills – a short-term bill holding back funding for immigration enforcement agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and another measure funding the rest of the government for a full year.”

A second option would be a Continuing Resolution (CR), which would be a short-term funding bill that would allow the new Congress to take up the issue again when they convene early next year – ideally with enough backbone to withhold any funding from the president’s amnesty-to-work scheme.

Unfortunately, recollections of last year’s government shutdown still loom, and should Republicans pass a CR that does not fund amnesty and Obama refuses to sign it a partial government shutdown could ensue – a risk many Republicans are unwilling to take.

By going the rescission route, Republican leadership can gain the desirable sound bite: “We voted to pull funding from the president’s amnesty plan.” In that case, the truth would be that they voted against amnesty, but only after they voted to allow it.