LadyGunSlinger
Conservative Babe
- Feb 6, 2011
- 19,589
- 3,354
- 280
Again, where , what and WTF are you people talking about?
High court limits president's appointments power
- Thread starter depotoo
- Start date
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #62
Your delusions to cognitive adequacy continue.
The ruling is a limitation on the Constitution itself.
How does SCOTUS decided the need no longer exists.
Zander
Platinum Member
The number of appointments is irrelevant.
Bush and Reagan didn't decide that Congress was in recess, then make illegal appointments. Obama did. That is why he got his ass handed to him, unanimously, for the 12th time.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,679
- 17,615
- 2,250
It was Scalia who wrote that opinion.
LadyGunSlinger
Conservative Babe
- Feb 6, 2011
- 19,589
- 3,354
- 280
How does SCOTUS DECIDED??? What the hell kind of a sentence is that you toothless ****? WHERE IN THE ******* RECESS CLAUSE DOES THE WORD NEED APPEAR YOU DUMBASS??
LadyGunSlinger
Conservative Babe
- Feb 6, 2011
- 19,589
- 3,354
- 280
AGAIN, The Recess Appointments Clause provides that “[t]he President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session- where the **** is the word need??????
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,679
- 17,615
- 2,250
It is when you say "Democrats blocked most of Bush's appointments". They didn't. They eventually came to a compromise with Bush too. Eventually the Democrats realized(aftger the GOP kept beating them over the head with it) that there was no compromise coming for Obama and took action themselves to stop the obstructionism.
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,721
- 13,434
- 2,280
- Thread starter
- #68
The Supreme Court ruled that the president's actions were unconstitutional:
"President ObamaÂ’s attempt to make appointments to the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was still technically in session was unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday."
The verdict was 9-0. Scalia said in presenting the opinion of the court that:
"“The need [the recess appointments clause] was designed to fill no longer exists, and its only remaining use is the ignoble one of enabling the president to circumvent the Senate’s role in the appoint*ment process,” Scalia wrote, adding that the majority opinion would ”have the effect of aggrandizing the presidency beyond its constitutional bounds and undermining respect for the separation of powers.”"
Supreme Court deals blow to Obama on recess appointments | MSNBC
Obama is a constitutional lawyer.....really?.....too funny.
.
So the SC just re-wrote the constitution?
What if a future court decides that the needs the 2nd Amendment was designed to fill no longer exists? What-cha gonna do then?
Ronald Reagan made 232 recess appointments during his eight years in office. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush each made well more than 100. In 1903, Theodore Roosevelt made more than 160 recess appointments during one short break between congressional sessions.
To date, Obama has made only 32 recess appointments.
You do forget that for most of his first 2 years he had both houses, when most appointments will occur.
LadyGunSlinger
Conservative Babe
- Feb 6, 2011
- 19,589
- 3,354
- 280
I'm waiting for an answer STILL, ******* 13 minutes later from all you buffoons who cried about the Constitution being changed, specifically the Recess-Appointments Clause. I've looked everywhere for the language which includes the word, "need" and I don't ******* see it... So show me exactly where it appears/ed.
Ibentoken
Don't Tread on Me
Yep. Obviously, the USSC is racist, huh.
Siete
Platinum Member
- May 19, 2014
- 34,325
- 3,993
- 1,130
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,679
- 17,615
- 2,250
In Scalia's opinion.
They reneged on their compromise. When the GOP tried to do the same thing the Dems invoked the nuclear option they swore would lead to tyranny when the GOP proposed it.
Democrats are the biggest ******* hypocrites to walk the planet.
LadyGunSlinger
Conservative Babe
- Feb 6, 2011
- 19,589
- 3,354
- 280
There it is^^^^ This dumb **** liberal spewed all over this thread about the US Constitution being changed, the Recess Clause specifically and instead of correcting himself, he doubles down on stupid.
LadyGunSlinger
Conservative Babe
- Feb 6, 2011
- 19,589
- 3,354
- 280
Scalia's opinion is now a Clause within the United States Constitution?? REALLY???? The word need never appeared in the clause to begin with..MY GOD.. you ******* people.. It's called the Originalist INTENT - HIS opinion is founded upon what he construes the Originalist to have meant.. NOTHING WAS RE-WRITTEN in the US Constitution..
Little-Acorn
Gold Member
(yawn) He made "recess appointments" when the Senate was not in recess....
Zander
Platinum Member
The problem is Obama took "Action" that was blatantly unconstitutional. He either knew it was illegal when he did it or he is a dullard.
He will get the same treatment from the SCOTUS with regards to his abuse of Executive Orders....the executive does not write laws.
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,721
- 13,434
- 2,280
- Thread starter
- #78
Really? Bush was kind of tired of it, too.
,,,,,,,,,,,,
On November 16, 2007, the Senate Majority Leader announced that the Senate would “be coming in for pro forma sessions during the Thanksgiving holiday to prevent recess appointments.”21 The Senate recessed later that day and pro forma meetings22 were convened on November 20, 23, 27, and 29, with no business conducted. The Senate next conducted business after reconvening on December 3, 2007. The President made no recess appointments during that period. On December 19, 2007, the Senate Majority Leader announced that similar pro forma meetings would be held in the following days, again for the purpose of preventing the President from making recess appointments.23 Later that day, the Senate agreed, by unanimous consent, to hold a series of pro forma meetings until sine die adjournment of the first session, and to hold another series beginning with the convening of the second session.24 The Senate recessed on December 19, 2007, and pro forma meetings were held on December 21, 23, 26, 28, and 31. The Senate adjourned sine die on December 31, 2007. On January 3, 2008, the Senate convened its second session, but no other business was conducted. Pro forma meetings of the Senate were held on January 7, 9, 11, 15, and 18. On January 22, the Senate reconvened and conducted business. The President made no recess appointments between December 19, 2007, and January 22, 2008. Similar procedures were followed during other periods, in 2008, that would otherwise have been Senate recesses of a week or longer in duration.25 On September 17, 2008, the Senate Majority Leader announced, with regard to the Senate, “We are going to have to get some committee hearings underway, which is why we are not going to adjourn. We will be in pro forma session so committees can still meet, though we won’t have any activities here on the floor as relates to these markets.”26 On October 2, 2008, the Senate agreed, by unanimous consent, to hold a series of pro forma meetings between that date and November 17, 2008, when they would reconvene and conduct business.27
,,,,,,,,,,,,
On November 16, 2007, the Senate Majority Leader announced that the Senate would “be coming in for pro forma sessions during the Thanksgiving holiday to prevent recess appointments.”21 The Senate recessed later that day and pro forma meetings22 were convened on November 20, 23, 27, and 29, with no business conducted. The Senate next conducted business after reconvening on December 3, 2007. The President made no recess appointments during that period. On December 19, 2007, the Senate Majority Leader announced that similar pro forma meetings would be held in the following days, again for the purpose of preventing the President from making recess appointments.23 Later that day, the Senate agreed, by unanimous consent, to hold a series of pro forma meetings until sine die adjournment of the first session, and to hold another series beginning with the convening of the second session.24 The Senate recessed on December 19, 2007, and pro forma meetings were held on December 21, 23, 26, 28, and 31. The Senate adjourned sine die on December 31, 2007. On January 3, 2008, the Senate convened its second session, but no other business was conducted. Pro forma meetings of the Senate were held on January 7, 9, 11, 15, and 18. On January 22, the Senate reconvened and conducted business. The President made no recess appointments between December 19, 2007, and January 22, 2008. Similar procedures were followed during other periods, in 2008, that would otherwise have been Senate recesses of a week or longer in duration.25 On September 17, 2008, the Senate Majority Leader announced, with regard to the Senate, “We are going to have to get some committee hearings underway, which is why we are not going to adjourn. We will be in pro forma session so committees can still meet, though we won’t have any activities here on the floor as relates to these markets.”26 On October 2, 2008, the Senate agreed, by unanimous consent, to hold a series of pro forma meetings between that date and November 17, 2008, when they would reconvene and conduct business.27
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,679
- 17,615
- 2,250
Yes, it was his opinion that there is no longer a need for the clause.
Good lord, is it that hard a concept to grasp?
Little-Acorn
Gold Member
"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session." - U.S. Constitution
----------------------------------
Supreme Court Limits President Obama's Appointment Powers - NationalJournal.com
In the view of the Court, as written by Breyer, "pro forma sessions count as sessions, not as periods of recess. We hold that, for purposes of the Recess Appointments Clause, the Senate is in session when it says it is, provided that, under its own rules, it retains the capacity to transact Senate business. The Senate met that standard here."
----------------------------------------
Better luck next time, Demmies.
As I recall, the NLRB was unable to do any business until (at least some) of its vacancies were filled. They didn't have enough for a quorom, if memory serves. Obama's illegal appointments filled the quorum, and the NLRB proceeded to make a number of rulings, decisions etc.
Now that those appointments have been found illegal, do the decisions made by the NLRB during that period, get rescinded?
----------------------------------
Supreme Court Limits President Obama's Appointment Powers - NationalJournal.com
In the view of the Court, as written by Breyer, "pro forma sessions count as sessions, not as periods of recess. We hold that, for purposes of the Recess Appointments Clause, the Senate is in session when it says it is, provided that, under its own rules, it retains the capacity to transact Senate business. The Senate met that standard here."
----------------------------------------
Better luck next time, Demmies.
As I recall, the NLRB was unable to do any business until (at least some) of its vacancies were filled. They didn't have enough for a quorom, if memory serves. Obama's illegal appointments filled the quorum, and the NLRB proceeded to make a number of rulings, decisions etc.
Now that those appointments have been found illegal, do the decisions made by the NLRB during that period, get rescinded?
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Trump Tells Pearl Harbor Joke After Japanese Journalist Asks Him Why He Didn't Tell Japan About The Attack On Iran- Started by mudwhistle
- Replies: 1
-
Some DHS Contractors Told White House Officials They Were asked To Pay Corey Lewandowski
- Started by 0311
- Replies: 1
-
The average Democrat voter doesn't know it voted, this is why...- Started by TheGreatSatan
- Replies: 1
-
