It's Official: Obama violated the Constitution

Did you read the ruling? Are you aware that Obama actually signed a bill that passed during the time you are now arguing the Senate was in recess? Does being so intellectually dishonest bother you?

I'm asking how Recess is defined. Don't build a staw man when you have no matches and the staw is wet.

It is my undersanding the Senate is playing a game, having few members present but not conducting a spit of business. Is that true, or am I mistaken?

See: Recess appointment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to the Constitution, Recess is defined as the period between two sessions of the Senate. Unless you can point to something about games, or something that requires them to actually take a recess, in the Constitution I don't think you have a point

Can you?

While you are at it, can you explain why Obama not nominating anyone for the posts is not playing games? Or do you only complain about games when they get in the way of your imaginative beliefs.

Recess appointment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Thirty were made during recesses between Congresses or between sessions of Congress (intersession recess appointments). The remaining 141 were made during recesses within sessions of Congress (intrasession recess appointments). The duration of the 24 recesses during which President Bush made recess appointments ranged from 10 to 47 days. ..."

https://opencrs.com/document/RL33310/
 
Last edited:
I'm asking how Recess is defined. Don't build a staw man when you have no matches and the staw is wet.

It is my undersanding the Senate is playing a game, having few members present but not conducting a spit of business. Is that true, or am I mistaken?

See: Recess appointment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to the Constitution, Recess is defined as the period between two sessions of the Senate. Unless you can point to something about games, or something that requires them to actually take a recess, in the Constitution I don't think you have a point

Can you?

While you are at it, can you explain why Obama not nominating anyone for the posts is not playing games? Or do you only complain about games when they get in the way of your imaginative beliefs.

Recess appointment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Thirty were made during recesses between Congresses or between sessions of Congress (intersession recess appointments). The remaining 141 were made during recesses within sessions of Congress (intrasession recess appointments). The duration of the 24 recesses during which President Bush made recess appointments ranged from 10 to 47 days. ..."

https://opencrs.com/document/RL33310/

I have already said that the Bush recess appointments were unconstitutional, are you trying to prove you don't pay attention?

By the way, the decision today basically said that all modern recess appointments were unconstitutional.
 
1. "Appeals court panel rules Obama recess appointments to labor board are unconstitutional

2. WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.

3. ...U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.

4. ... an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions.




5. The ruling also throws into question Obama’s recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray’s appointment, also made under the recess circumstance, has been challenged in a separate case.

6. ...if it stands, it means hundreds of decisions issued by the board over more than a year are invalid.




7. The court’s decision is a victory for Republicans and business groups that have been attacking the labor board for issuing a series of decisions and rules that make it easier for the nation’s labor unions to organize new members."
Appeals court panel rules Obama recess appointments to labor board are unconstitutional - The Washington Post



About time.....

....and hopes for many happy returns!
:clap2:
 
According to the Constitution, Recess is defined as the period between two sessions of the Senate. Unless you can point to something about games, or something that requires them to actually take a recess, in the Constitution I don't think you have a point

Can you?

While you are at it, can you explain why Obama not nominating anyone for the posts is not playing games? Or do you only complain about games when they get in the way of your imaginative beliefs.

Recess appointment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Thirty were made during recesses between Congresses or between sessions of Congress (intersession recess appointments). The remaining 141 were made during recesses within sessions of Congress (intrasession recess appointments). The duration of the 24 recesses during which President Bush made recess appointments ranged from 10 to 47 days. ..."

https://opencrs.com/document/RL33310/

I have already said that the Bush recess appointments were unconstitutional, are you trying to prove you don't pay attention?

By the way, the decision today basically said that all modern recess appointments were unconstitutional.

I pointed out the three conservative judges ignored 150 years of precedents. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Though recent experience suggests the GOP believes otherwise.
 
Looks as if the Mods have missed the fact that three threads on this same issue have already been posted by RW trolls. So, repeating my final post on this thread should not be seen as spamming.

Ah yes, the appeal to authority, what a surprise. How does the original intent of the framers - a position you hold - comport with a lesser court? How will the Supreme Court rule (5-4 most likely). So save your lectures for the fools who believe you're more than the silly troll you are.

Now answer my question. What is the original intent of Art. II, Sec. 2, clause 3; To Wit:

"The President shall have the Power to full up All Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate".


It seems the three conservative judges who made the aforementioned ruling disregarded 150 years of precedent and even acknowledged so in their ruling.

"The President shall have the Power to full up All Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate".

I don't see the words "pro forma" recess in that statement. That is what was ruled on and the wannabee dictator lost.

Games people play will be vetted by the Supreme Court (5-4 most likely), and for a time that will be what the COTUS means. Those who suggest it is written in Clay Tablets by an omnipotent force are the few, the partisan and the ridiculous. Nowhere in the phrase quoted above is "Recess of the Senate" defined, nor the words "pro forma" included.

The definition of recess of the Senate or the House is clearly stated in the Constitution.

Article One, section Five of the Constitution states:

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days...

The following is what took place when Obama called it a recess and made his unconstitutional recess appointments.

The Senate cannot recess for more than three days without the House's permission. The House did not grant permission, and as a result both houses were holding pro forma sessions out of constitutional necessity.

Hint: Holding pro forma sessions by definition means they are in session!

One would think that a constitutional law professor would know that.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top