Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Leaving aside the constitutional questions, there is a potential statutory problem with the legality of the Cordray appointment under Dodd-Frank. Section 1066 of Dodd-Frank provides that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform the functions of the CFPB under the subtitle transferring authority to the CFPB from the other agencies until the Director of the Bureau is confirmed by the Senate in accordance with Section 1011. It turns out that section 1011 is a defined term which provides: The Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
This seems to suggest that even if the President might be able to appoint Cordray under the recess power the full grant of statutory authority wouldnt transfer to the Bureau unless the statutory language was fulfilled as well.
Leftists, liberals and Democrats do not care if it is legal or illegal. They want Obama to show some fight! Even if it is on an issue nobody gives a shit about. He's been such a disappointment for liberals, they'll take anything- even if it's illegal.
Obama does one thing well- campaign. With this appointment, he's officially kicked his campaign off....
I though Obama studied law at some point.
Leaving aside the constitutional questions, there is a potential statutory problem with the legality of the Cordray appointment under Dodd-Frank. Section 1066 of Dodd-Frank provides that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform the functions of the CFPB under the subtitle transferring authority to the CFPB from the other agencies until the Director of the Bureau is confirmed by the Senate in accordance with Section 1011. It turns out that section 1011 is a defined term which provides: The Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
This seems to suggest that even if the President might be able to appoint Cordray under the recess power the full grant of statutory authority wouldnt transfer to the Bureau unless the statutory language was fulfilled as well.
The Volokh Conspiracy » Legality of Cordray Appointment Under Dodd-Frank
I though Obama studied law at some point.
Leaving aside the constitutional questions, there is a potential statutory problem with the legality of the Cordray appointment under Dodd-Frank. Section 1066 of Dodd-Frank provides that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform the functions of the CFPB under the subtitle transferring authority to the CFPB from the other agencies until the Director of the Bureau is confirmed by the Senate in accordance with Section 1011. It turns out that section 1011 is a defined term which provides: The Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
This seems to suggest that even if the President might be able to appoint Cordray under the recess power the full grant of statutory authority wouldnt transfer to the Bureau unless the statutory language was fulfilled as well.
The Volokh Conspiracy » Legality of Cordray Appointment Under Dodd-Frank
Nah, the minority does not say when the Senate is in session, and the President has the authority to make a recess appointment. The courts will rule for the president on this one.
If the Dems in power in the Senate says it was in recess, the minority cannot overrule it. Minority interp does not rule in this case. The courts will rule for the Dems. Republicans have many other problems without fighting a losing one like this.
If the Dems in power in the Senate says it was in recess, the minority cannot overrule it. Minority interp does not rule in this case. The courts will rule for the Dems. Republicans have many other problems without fighting a losing one like this.
Sadly, you have no facts on your side.
If the Dems in power in the Senate says it was in recess, the minority cannot overrule it. Minority interp does not rule in this case. The courts will rule for the Dems. Republicans have many other problems without fighting a losing one like this.
Sadly, you have no facts on your side.
Sadly, you have no idea on how to recess the Senate. Watch, wait, and learn.
The constitution to a liberals is as daylight to vampires.Sadly, you have no facts on your side.
Sadly, you have no idea on how to recess the Senate. Watch, wait, and learn.
Ever read the Constitution? It states that both Houses must agree to recess and that neither may do so without the other, the 3 day thing is the maximum time one house can quit business without approval of the other house.
Further the Constitution states that each house makes its own rules.
You might want to READ the document.
I though Obama studied law at some point.
Leaving aside the constitutional questions, there is a potential statutory problem with the legality of the Cordray appointment under Dodd-Frank. Section 1066 of Dodd-Frank provides that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform the functions of the CFPB under the subtitle transferring authority to the CFPB from the other agencies until the Director of the Bureau is confirmed by the Senate in accordance with Section 1011. It turns out that section 1011 is a defined term which provides: The Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
This seems to suggest that even if the President might be able to appoint Cordray under the recess power the full grant of statutory authority wouldnt transfer to the Bureau unless the statutory language was fulfilled as well.
The Volokh Conspiracy » Legality of Cordray Appointment Under Dodd-Frank
Sadly, you have no facts on your side.
Sadly, you have no idea on how to recess the Senate. Watch, wait, and learn.
Ever read the Constitution? It states that both Houses must agree to recess and that neither may do so without the other, the 3 day thing is the maximum time one house can quit business without approval of the other house.
Further the Constitution states that each house makes its own rules.
You might want to READ the document.
the Obama's understanding of history and the law are considerably slighter than mine - He's certainly no prodigy.Studying the law taught him how to position himself above it.I though Obama studied law at some point.
Leaving aside the constitutional questions, there is a potential statutory problem with the legality of the Cordray appointment under Dodd-Frank. Section 1066 of Dodd-Frank provides that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to perform the functions of the CFPB under the subtitle transferring authority to the CFPB from the other agencies “until the Director of the Bureau is confirmed by the Senate in accordance with Section 1011.” It turns out that section 1011 is a defined term which provides: “The Director shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”
This seems to suggest that even if the President might be able to appoint Cordray under the recess power the full grant of statutory authority wouldn’t transfer to the Bureau unless the statutory language was fulfilled as well.
The Volokh Conspiracy » Legality of Cordray Appointment Under Dodd-Frank
If the Dems in power in the Senate says it was in recess, the minority cannot overrule it. Minority interp does not rule in this case. The courts will rule for the Dems. Republicans have many other problems without fighting a losing one like this.
Sadly, you have no facts on your side.
Sadly, you have no idea on how to recess the Senate. Watch, wait, and learn.
