Peter1469
01-16-2014, 09:12 PM
Recess Appointments and SCOTUS (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/13/justices-skeptical-obamas-recess-appointment-claim/)
Back in January 2012, Obama used his recess authority to appoint 3 people to the National Labor Relations Board. The problem: the Senate said that it was still in session.
This is a big deal. The the recess appointments are voided, so with the Boards decisions since the date of appointment. That is going to cause a lot of problems.
And this could be a 9-0 decision.
Under the Constitution, the president has the duty to nominate key officials, but the Senate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/) is given the power to confirm them. Recognizing that Congress (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/), particularly in its early days, was sitting only a few weeks or months a year, the founders also created an emergency clause saying the president “shall have the power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/).”
In recent years, with Congress (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/) meeting almost continuously, the recess appointment power instead has become a tool that presidents of both parties have used to circumvent Congress (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/) when senators have tried to obstruct his nominations.
In 2012, frustrated that the Senate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/) wouldn’t act on his nominees to the National Labor Relations Board (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/national-labor-relations-board/), which would have meant the board (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/national-labor-relations-board/) lost a quorum and couldn’t act, Mr. Obama did an end run.
Back in January 2012, Obama used his recess authority to appoint 3 people to the National Labor Relations Board. The problem: the Senate said that it was still in session.
This is a big deal. The the recess appointments are voided, so with the Boards decisions since the date of appointment. That is going to cause a lot of problems.
And this could be a 9-0 decision.
Under the Constitution, the president has the duty to nominate key officials, but the Senate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/) is given the power to confirm them. Recognizing that Congress (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/), particularly in its early days, was sitting only a few weeks or months a year, the founders also created an emergency clause saying the president “shall have the power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/).”
In recent years, with Congress (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/) meeting almost continuously, the recess appointment power instead has become a tool that presidents of both parties have used to circumvent Congress (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/congress/) when senators have tried to obstruct his nominations.
In 2012, frustrated that the Senate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/senate/) wouldn’t act on his nominees to the National Labor Relations Board (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/national-labor-relations-board/), which would have meant the board (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/national-labor-relations-board/) lost a quorum and couldn’t act, Mr. Obama did an end run.