This is so new, I can't even find an article on it yet. So, I'm going to quote from what I just saw on FOX News in an interview between Martha McCallum and Jay Sekulow. Martha: As we've been telling you, today President Obama is visiting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau - that's the new agency that's been created to protect us from financial agencies and the wrath we saw in 2008. And he appointed Richard Cordray as the Chief of that agency - and that's sparked a huge controversy...and a newly filed lawsuit today, is claiming that President Obama violated the Constitution by not seeking congressional approval for that appointment. Jay Sekulow is the Chief Counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice. Jay welcome. So tell me about the lawsuit. Jay: We haven't filed it yet; we're looking at all the options. We're not gonna be the only ones, btw, looks like there's gonna be 3 or 4. Here's what it is: There's two provisions of the Constitution at play. Article 1, which is the congressional authority - which sets their own recess schedule, and there's article 2, the presidential authority. And the Congress isn't in recess. What you've got is a situation where the presidents can make recess appointments when the Congress is in recess. But that's not the case here. What's making it even more complicated is, the nominees for the National Labor Relations board were just made toward the end of December, so they didn't even have time for hearings. This is a usurpation of congressional authority, and a power grab by the administration that frankly, I don't think we've ever seen in our constitutional history. This was a very brazen and bold move by the president. Martha: The more you dig into this, the more there appears there's an issue here. The Senate was in pro-forma session....technically being in session, but really no one doing any business. This tactic was used a lot during the Bush administration and President Obama was in favor of it then. Jay: Right. In fact, Obama was one of the architects in 2006 of putting in this pro-forma plan so Congress could NOT get in a recess situation. Let me take this point a bit further, btw. The democrats keep saying "oh this is just pro-forma" - you know that tax payroll extension that they all debated last month? That was done in a pro forma session. So this argument they have that nothing is actually happening is A) false, and B) this is the democrats own technique, it's their own scheme,, it's their own method, and they set the precedent for this. So for them now to say it's unjust, when they're the ones who implemented it, is not gonna fly legally and it's not gonna fly with the American people. Martha: Do you think there will focus and attention on this? Will it be followed through on, in a way that could perhaps overturn these appointments? Jay: I think there's a realistic chance. I think you're gonna see litigation. That'll be up to the courts to decide. And, I think the president has just unintentionally created a political issue; a huge political issue. Because the President of the United States is President of the United States. He's the chief executive officer. He's not the King, he's not the Sovereign. He doesn't get to make up the rules on his own. He has to play by our rule book. And our rule book is the United States Constitution. That has been shredded here. There are specific provisions of the Constitution at play. There's a clash now between the executive and the legislative branch of the government and that's going to be resolved in the courts, but at the end of the day, the President has set up his own constitutional crisis. He may have had political reasons for doing it, but he's going to pay the consequences. Martha: And essentially what's behind some of the dissatisfaction with the creation of this new agency is that people feel that it's going to be anti-business. We looked this up this morning - this is a brand new government agency, and they employ 700 people already - at this agency ! Jay: And the US Chamber of Commerce is very much opposed to this, as is a lot of business interest, but frankly I think it's not just going to be the chamber, it's gonna be the American people, realizing what's happened to the Constitution here. Martha: 700 people employed !! You've got 3,846 people - at last count - at the SEC and we all know what a great job they did alerting the American public to the problems that were happening to the financial industries in 2008. -end of interview- Well, I can't wait to see the admin spin this - that it doesn't matter. Hmmm- Do we have a POTUS who is circumventing the Congress and the Constitution? Hasn't he made it clear already in words and deed that he sees the Constitution as an impediment to his agenda? Hasn't, in fact, he said he will go around Congress? Is he a president or a King?