National Groups File Challenge to Obama’s Unconstitutional Stacking of NLRB

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If there is a constitutional crisis here it is the refusal of congress to do their stinking jobs.

True.

And the CE would be remiss in his duties to not appoint administrators needed to run government agencies; the NLRB was established by Congress reflecting the will of the American people, as authorized by the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, and upheld by the Supreme Court.

 

[occupied]

This kind of crap is going to become the new normal, either get used to it or start telling politicians to start picking their battles instead of just obstructing everything for the lulz.

 

[BlindBoo]

The constitution explicitly grants the President the power to fill vacancies when the Senate is in recess with commissions that expire at the end of the Senate's session. It's absolutely asinine to insist that Obama violated the constitution for exercising a power explicitly given to his office.

Once again: in order for the President to exercise that authority, geniu, the Senate has to be IN recess.

It wasn't.

So what's asinine is your refusal to premise you whinnying braying blather on the actual state of facts.

I'm sure that once Congress is back in session from their long seasonal holiday they will do something about it don't you?

The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. If fact they are in a recess now until tomorrow at noon.

 

[The Rabbi]

This kind of crap is going to become the new normal, either get used to it or start telling politicians to start picking their battles instead of just obstructing everything for the lulz.

The Dems are reaping what they've sown. This started with the Dems blocking Bush's judicial picks, "for the good of the country" of course. Actually it started before that, with the Dems blocking Reagan's appointment of Bork for political reasons.
Now that the GOP is engaging in similar tactics it is suddenly unfair and against the country's interest.
The Left are the biggest hypocrites to walk the planet.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

links in article at site

SNIP:
by Don Loos

The National Right To Work (NRTW) joined by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), and Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) took off the legal gloves and are forcing the Obama Administration to defend its unconstitutional appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Some say that President Barack Obama is creating a serious constitutional crisis.

This is the first legal challenge regarding these NLRB Board appointees who Obama appointed without a U.S. Senate confirmation process; but, more are expected.



From the NRTW release:


Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama’s recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

read it all here with comments
» National Groups File Challenge to Obama

The injured party in this case is the Senate. The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no standing to sue.

 

[Liability]

links in article at site

SNIP:
by Don Loos

The National Right To Work (NRTW) joined by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), and Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) took off the legal gloves and are forcing the Obama Administration to defend its unconstitutional appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Some say that President Barack Obama is creating a serious constitutional crisis.

This is the first legal challenge regarding these NLRB Board appointees who Obama appointed without a U.S. Senate confirmation process; but, more are expected.



From the NRTW release:


Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama’s recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

read it all here with comments
» National Groups File Challenge to Obama

The injured party in this case is the Senate. The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no standing to sue.

Right. ONLY the Senate has standing to sue.



Oompydoofy is not even marginally persuasive.

 

[Liability]

The constitution explicitly grants the President the power to fill vacancies when the Senate is in recess with commissions that expire at the end of the Senate's session. It's absolutely asinine to insist that Obama violated the constitution for exercising a power explicitly given to his office.

Once again: in order for the President to exercise that authority, geniu, the Senate has to be IN recess.

It wasn't.

So what's asinine is your refusal to premise you whinnying braying blather on the actual state of facts.

I'm sure that once Congress is back in session from their long seasonal holiday they will do something about it don't you?

The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. If fact they are in a recess now until tomorrow at noon.

No. They can't do jack or shit about a "recess" appointment, dork.

The Senate is also controlled by the dishonorable liberal Democrat Parody. So you know full well they wouldn't lift a fucking finger against The One, anyway.

And you are also factually wrong about what the Constitution DOES say about a recess.

You dope.

 

[paulitician]

I wish them well. And it's not about Politics for me on this issue. This President has disdain for our Constitution. Checks & Balances desperately need to be restored.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

links in article at site

SNIP:
by Don Loos

The National Right To Work (NRTW) joined by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), and Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) took off the legal gloves and are forcing the Obama Administration to defend its unconstitutional appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Some say that President Barack Obama is creating a serious constitutional crisis.

This is the first legal challenge regarding these NLRB Board appointees who Obama appointed without a U.S. Senate confirmation process; but, more are expected.



From the NRTW release:


Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama’s recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

read it all here with comments
» National Groups File Challenge to Obama

The injured party in this case is the Senate. The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no standing to sue.

Right. ONLY the Senate has standing to sue.



Oompydoofy is not even marginally persuasive.

The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no authority to appoint people to government positions, thus they have no injury as a result of the appointment. If the appointment was indeed unconstitutional, the injured party was the Senate. Of course, had the Senate actually been in session, they could have done something about it.

 

[Liability]

The injured party in this case is the Senate. The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no standing to sue.

Right. ONLY the Senate has standing to sue.



Oompydoofy is not even marginally persuasive.

The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no authority to appoint people to government positions, thus they have no injury as a result of the appointment. If the appointment was indeed unconstitutional, the injured party was the Senate. Of course, had the Senate actually been in session, they could have done something about it.

You have not the slightest comprehension of what constitutes or doesn't constitute "standing."

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Right. ONLY the Senate has standing to sue.



Oompydoofy is not even marginally persuasive.

The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no authority to appoint people to government positions, thus they have no injury as a result of the appointment. If the appointment was indeed unconstitutional, the injured party was the Senate. Of course, had the Senate actually been in session, they could have done something about it.

You have not the slightest comprehension of what constitutes or doesn't constitute "standing."

I'm telling you what the court will rule.

National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has not sustained injury to legally protected interest. They thus have no standing.


By your logic every single person in the U.S. would have standing to sue every time they perceived any part of the government has violated the Constitution. Its funny how the right wing which claims to be in favor of reducing how much Americans litigate would favor a system where everyone would have standing to sue the government for basically anything the government does.

 

[Zander]

Obama doesn't need the constitution....

 

[freedombecki]

links in article at site

SNIP:
by Don Loos

The National Right To Work (NRTW) joined by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), and Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) took off the legal gloves and are forcing the Obama Administration to defend its unconstitutional appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Some say that President Barack Obama is creating a serious constitutional crisis.

This is the first legal challenge regarding these NLRB Board appointees who Obama appointed without a U.S. Senate confirmation process; but, more are expected.

From the NRTW release:

Washington, DC (January 13, 2012) – Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed a motion in federal court challenging the legality of President Barack Obama’s recent purported recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

read it all here with comments
» National Groups File Challenge to Obama

Good to see somebody is finally challenging it because the Republicans are sure too damn chickeshit to stand up to him.

That is not so. John Boehner stands up to President Obama all the time.
Rick Perry does. Newt Gingrich does. Eric Cantor does.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Obama doesn't need the constitution....

These suits will go as far as the birther suits.

The plaintiffs may even be fined for making a frivolous claim and wasting the court's time.

 

[BlindBoo]

Once again: in order for the President to exercise that authority, geniu, the Senate has to be IN recess.

It wasn't.

So what's asinine is your refusal to premise you whinnying braying blather on the actual state of facts.

I'm sure that once Congress is back in session from their long seasonal holiday they will do something about it don't you?

The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. If fact they are in a recess now until tomorrow at noon.

No. They can't do jack or shit about a "recess" appointment, dork.

The Senate is also controlled by the dishonorable liberal Democrat Parody. So you know full well they wouldn't lift a fucking finger against The One, anyway.

And you are also factually wrong about what the Constitution DOES say about a recess.

You dope.

If it was unconstitutional then they have an obligation to do something about it, don't you think?

Well lets see the quote from the Constitution and defines what length of time is considered a recess in the Senate!

You are incorrect. The appointments made by the President were not unconstitutional. You were correct in that the Senate will do nothing about it either.

 

[Liability]

The National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has no authority to appoint people to government positions, thus they have no injury as a result of the appointment. If the appointment was indeed unconstitutional, the injured party was the Senate. Of course, had the Senate actually been in session, they could have done something about it.

You have not the slightest comprehension of what constitutes or doesn't constitute "standing."

I'm telling you what the court will rule.

No. You're not. You're stating an ignorant and generally baseless opinion. Only a complete imbecile would suggest that only the fucking Senate would have standing to sue. You qualify as that imbecile.

National Right To Fuck Workers Hard Foundation has not sustained injury to legally protected interest. They thus have no standing.

Saying it and repeating it still doesn't make it so, dim shit. You can't even articulate the principle of "standing to sue," you jerk off.

By your logic every single person in the U.S. would have standing to sue every time they perceived any part of the government has violated the Constitution. Its funny how the right wing which claims to be in favor of reducing how much Americans litigate would favor a system where everyone would have standing to sue the government for basically anything the government does.

Zzzzzzz.

By YOUR would-be logic NOBODY in America would have standing to sue.

You simply don't have the first fucking clue on the topic.

I shall deign to assist you and help alleviate a small portion of your boundless ignorance, though. Think of it like this: to articulate "standing" you have to plead facts that you are one of the people who is in imminent danger of being injured by the complained of act. You MUST have some skin in the game, so to speak.

If someone in YOUR village is building a multi story building next door to YOUR plot of land, and that violates a local village zoning ordinance, and the building will cast a shadow over your little house and garden that will interfere with your quiet enjoyment of your property. Under those circumstances, you might very well have a sound basis to plead sufficient facts to allege "standing."

By contrast, although I might think of you as a great guy (unlikely, but as long as it's all make-believe, let's run with that), I probably cannot file suit against your neighbor on my own behalf alleging that he is in violation of YOUR local zoning ordinance since I am not affected by that fact.

In the latter example, I would not have "standing to sue."

Now tell me why, genius, a National Right to Work group wouldn't have standing to complain about the President's violation of the Constitution that WOULD affect the NLRB and thus all the workers whom the National Right to Work organization represents?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Now tell me why, genius, a National Right to Work group wouldn't have standing to complain about the President's violation of the Constitution that WOULD affect the NLRB and thus all the workers whom the National Right to Work organization represents?

I didn't say they didn't have standing to complain. Its a free country, everyone can complain all the want.

When you're ready to tell us all the specific injury to a legally protected interest that the plaintiffs suffered, let us know.

 

[Liability]

I'm sure that once Congress is back in session from their long seasonal holiday they will do something about it don't you?

The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. If fact they are in a recess now until tomorrow at noon.

No. They can't do jack or shit about a "recess" appointment, dork.

The Senate is also controlled by the dishonorable liberal Democrat Parody. So you know full well they wouldn't lift a fucking finger against The One, anyway.

And you are also factually wrong about what the Constitution DOES say about a recess.

You dope.

If it was unconstitutional then they have an obligation to do something about it, don't you think?

Well lets see the quote from the Constitution and defines what length of time is considered a recess in the Senate!

You are incorrect. The appointments made by the President were not unconstitutional. You were correct in that the Senate will do nothing about it either.

The answer to your first question is not just "no," but OBVIOUSLY "no." They have no such "obligation." It would be the RIGHT thing to do, perhaps, but that wouldn't impose any obligation on them.

Your lack of familiarity with the CONSTITUTIONAL is (thankfully) not binding on anybody. Try Art. I "Neither House may adjourn, without the consent of the other, for more than three days".

Section 5 - Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment

* * * *

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.

Art. I, §5, clause 4.

And, since the Senate was NOT in recess, YOU are wrong. The President's purported appointments were invalid.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No. They can't do jack or shit about a "recess" appointment, dork.

The Senate is also controlled by the dishonorable liberal Democrat Parody. So you know full well they wouldn't lift a fucking finger against The One, anyway.

And you are also factually wrong about what the Constitution DOES say about a recess.

You dope.

If it was unconstitutional then they have an obligation to do something about it, don't you think?

Well lets see the quote from the Constitution and defines what length of time is considered a recess in the Senate!

You are incorrect. The appointments made by the President were not unconstitutional. You were correct in that the Senate will do nothing about it either.

The answer to your first question is not just "no," but OBVIOUSLY "no." They have no such "obligation." It would be the RIGHT thing to do, perhaps, but that wouldn't impose any obligation on them.

Your lack of familiarity with the CONSTITUTIONAL is (thankfully) not binding on anybody. Try Art. I "Neither House may adjourn, without the consent of the other, for more than three days".

Section 5 - Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment

* * * *

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.

Art. I, §5, clause 4.

And, since the Senate was NOT in recess, YOU are wrong. The President's purported appointments were invalid.

Where does the Constitution say that the Senate adjourning for less than three days does not constitute a recess?

 

[g5000]

The GOP is butt hurt that some laws got passed they don't like. These same laws require appointments to some offices.

These laws require these appointments to be made. But the GOP is blocking these laws from being carried out. Even though they admit the guy nominated is eminently qualified for the job.

So the GOP has no room to be lecturing about the law.

Dishonest sore losers.

They are the ones that created this crisis. Not Obama.