Cordray appointment probably illegal

[paperview]

In order for the Senate to go in recess the House must recess. No such event occurred.
....

www.house.gov says "112th Congress, 2nd Session · The House is not in session".

 

[kwc57]

That is procedure, not law, and that Byrd did it is no excuse for the GOP, either.

Bush should have hammered the Dems as Obama is hammering the Pubs right now.

Watch and learn.

Oh I'm watching Dear Ruler making more attempts at a dictatorship. It won't happen. Not in America. Watch and learn comrade.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And its for a Federal Agency that is totally privately funded and not accountable to the People, like the Praetorian Guards or the Gestapo

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In order for the Senate to go in recess the House must recess. No such event occurred.
....

www.house.gov says "112th Congress, 2nd Session · The House is not in session".

I thought that the House and Senate were two different bodies?

Live and learn

 

[JakeStarkey]

The loonies of the far right have lost this one, big time.

 

[paperview]

In order for the Senate to go in recess the House must recess. No such event occurred.
....

www.house.gov says "112th Congress, 2nd Session · The House is not in session".

I thought that the House and Senate were two different bodies?

Live and learn

I guess reading the post one is responding to is beyond you, Frank.

Live and learn. One thing I've learned in my many years of reading your posts, is...somewhere along the line, you went wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off track.

Shame too.

 

[kwc57]

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Reid backs Obama after using pro forma sessions to block Bush - The Hill's On The Money

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who previously held pro forma sessions to block recess appointments by President George W. Bush, said Wednesday he supported President Obama's decision to ignore those sessions to push through one of his key nominees.

"I support President Obama's decision," he said in a statement.

"The White House announced Wednesday that Obama planned to recess appoint Richard Cordray to be director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). However, Republicans immediately cried foul about the move. They argue that because the holiday break has been broken up by brief pro forma sessions, the Senate is not in recess and the appointment is illegitimate....."

".....However, the White House maintains that those sessions, typically held every three days and lasting a few seconds, are not legitimate and can be ignored for the purpose of making recess appointments......"

"......On the other side of the argument at that time was Reid, who began holding pro forma sessions in 2007 to block Bush nominees.

"I had to keep the Senate in pro-forma session to block the Bradbury appointment. That necessarily meant no recess appointments could be made," he said on the Senate floor in 2008, as Democrats blocked a potential recess appointment of Steven Bradbury to be the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in the Bush administration........"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

www.house.gov says "112th Congress, 2nd Session · The House is not in session".

I thought that the House and Senate were two different bodies?

Live and learn

I guess reading the post one is responding to is beyond you, Frank.

Live and learn. One thing I've learned in my many years of reading your posts, is...somewhere along the line, you went wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off track.

Shame too.

I hate to do it but I have to PosRep you for that.

Thank you

 

[CrusaderFrank]

www.house.gov says "112th Congress, 2nd Session · The House is not in session".

I thought that the House and Senate were two different bodies?

Live and learn

I guess reading the post one is responding to is beyond you, Frank.

Live and learn. One thing I've learned in my many years of reading your posts, is...somewhere along the line, you went wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off track.

Shame too.

I went "off track" because we have the most unAmerican, anti-American POTUS ever. Am man who has us 84% employed, downgraded, record debt and deficits and says he one more term to "finish the job"

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are in the shape because of wack far right economic and financial policies.

Those days are over, the TPS has shot its bolt, and Romney is going to send you guys away once he is elected.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We are in the shape because of wack far right economic and financial policies.

Those days are over, the TPS has shot its bolt, and Romney is going to send you guys away once he is elected.

TPS, you mean the record 2010 Congressional turnover? Yes, that was then and this is now. We hope to improve on that

 

[Wiseacre]

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Reid backs Obama after using pro forma sessions to block Bush - The Hill's On The Money

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who previously held pro forma sessions to block recess appointments by President George W. Bush, said Wednesday he supported President Obama's decision to ignore those sessions to push through one of his key nominees.

"I support President Obama's decision," he said in a statement.

"The White House announced Wednesday that Obama planned to recess appoint Richard Cordray to be director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). However, Republicans immediately cried foul about the move. They argue that because the holiday break has been broken up by brief pro forma sessions, the Senate is not in recess and the appointment is illegitimate....."

".....However, the White House maintains that those sessions, typically held every three days and lasting a few seconds, are not legitimate and can be ignored for the purpose of making recess appointments......"

"......On the other side of the argument at that time was Reid, who began holding pro forma sessions in 2007 to block Bush nominees.

"I had to keep the Senate in pro-forma session to block the Bradbury appointment. That necessarily meant no recess appointments could be made," he said on the Senate floor in 2008, as Democrats blocked a potential recess appointment of Steven Bradbury to be the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in the Bush administration........"

Somebody on the left wanna try and explain to me why what Obama is doing isn't hypocritical? Bush couldn't do it, but Obama can? Why?

 

[Amelia]

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Reid backs Obama after using pro forma sessions to block Bush - The Hill's On The Money

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who previously held pro forma sessions to block recess appointments by President George W. Bush, said Wednesday he supported President Obama's decision to ignore those sessions to push through one of his key nominees.

"I support President Obama's decision," he said in a statement.

"The White House announced Wednesday that Obama planned to recess appoint Richard Cordray to be director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). However, Republicans immediately cried foul about the move. They argue that because the holiday break has been broken up by brief pro forma sessions, the Senate is not in recess and the appointment is illegitimate....."

".....However, the White House maintains that those sessions, typically held every three days and lasting a few seconds, are not legitimate and can be ignored for the purpose of making recess appointments......"

"......On the other side of the argument at that time was Reid, who began holding pro forma sessions in 2007 to block Bush nominees.

"I had to keep the Senate in pro-forma session to block the Bradbury appointment. That necessarily meant no recess appointments could be made," he said on the Senate floor in 2008, as Democrats blocked a potential recess appointment of Steven Bradbury to be the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in the Bush administration........"

Somebody on the left wanna try and explain to me why what Obama is doing isn't hypocritical? Bush couldn't do it, but Obama can? Why?

Because he is Obama and the end justifies the means. Even if the end is a legal mess, it justifies the means because he meant well. And that's all that counts.


Edit: Oh sorry, you said someone on the left. I'd like to hear that too.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

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.

Can you read Jake? Can you point out where I said anything about a recess, or sessions, the Constitution, or anything else? All I did was quote a section of the law that requires that the director be appointed by and with the consent of the Senate.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Ever read the Constitution?

Article 1 Section 5

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

This is why someone shows up every three days and gavels the Senate into a pro forma session, the House never gave them permission to adjourn. The president cannot simply say that, because the Senate is not doing business, they are not in session. Being a constitutional scholar Obama knows this, and also knows that, as president, he has the authority to actually force Congress to adjourn if there is a dispute about when to adjourn. If he had actually done that you might, I repeat might, have a point, since he did not you do not.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Actually, you need to do that, but thanks for playing.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

In order for the Senate to go in recess the House must recess. No such event occurred.
....

www.house.gov says "112th Congress, 2nd Session · The House is not in session".

Doesn't matter, and is totally irrelevant to the thread.

 

[daveman]

M-14 Pooter is an amoeba compared to Obama.

Do not question The One, -14, or you shall face the wrath of his acolyte, Jake!!

 

[Zander]

I don't care what party you favor- this shameless move by Obama sets a very bad precedent. A precedent that will eventually get around the Constitution's senatorial advice and consent clause all together, because what need is there for a confirmation process when the president can just declare Congress to be in recess whenever he wants?

 

[Polk]

Did any of you ever stop to think that Obama knows the nomination won't hold up, but made the move anyway to draw attention to the issue/provoke a confrontation with the Senate?