High court limits president's appointments power

[Quantum Windbag]

It's really the SC giving future Congresses the ability to block recess appointments by holding pro-forma cessions. Pretending to be in session specifically to deny the President the ability to make recess appointments. Funny part is it was the Democrats who first tried this tactic. But the point is moot now that the Senate has changed its rules.

Really?

Which Senate rule change are you delusional enough to believe stops pro forma sessions?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The Supreme Court ruled that the president's actions were unconstitutional:

"President Obama’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.

How did they rewrite the Constitution, oh font of all stupidity?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Where/ what section was re-written?? SHOW US.

"The need [the recess appointments clause] was designed to fill no longer exists"

"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."

What's to stop future courts from deciding others needs the Constitution was designed to fill "no longer exist".

Except they didn't say it is no longer needed, did they?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Of course, Obama can make ordinary in-session appointments, and have them confirmed by the Senate as the Constitution requires, all he wants.

Sounds like he doesn't want.

Gee, that's too bad.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

it is a shame the the GOP is crippling our government by blocking appointees...

Maybe, just maybe, if Obama had actually submitted those appointments, they would have been approved. Instead of doing that, he just appointed them without ever submitting them to the Senate.

In other words, the GOP had nothing to do with the positions not being filled, it is all on Obama.

 

[Bush92]

A minor procedural mistake that President Obama will no doubt never make again now that the Supreme Court has finally clarified the confusion surrounding the recess appointment rule.

Tea Party zealots, of course, will harp on this as evidence that President Obama is an evil dictator who usurps power, tramples the Constitution, etc., despite the fact that he hasn't done anything like this since the Court's decision. Our President respects the Constitution, conservatards--get that through your thick skulls.

"Minor procedural mistake" He knew exactly what the **** he was doing. Liberals...make excuses for Obama for anything. It's really sad.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"The need [the recess appointments clause] was designed to fill no longer exists"

"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."

What's to stop future courts from deciding others needs the Constitution was designed to fill "no longer exist".

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.

ARTICLE II, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 3

Come again?

the lower court ruling prior to the current ruling DID NOT give that authority to ANY president. ... for all you constitutionalists out there

For all you idiots out there, the lower court ruling was 100% correct. If you need evidence of that fact, the majority actually said that, since the government had been ignoring the Constitution for so long, they could keep doing it.

You seriously are not smart enough to argue with me about the Constitution, I suggest you STFU.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"The need [the recess appointments clause] was designed to fill no longer exists"

"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."

What's to stop future courts from deciding others needs the Constitution was designed to fill "no longer exist".

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.

ARTICLE II, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 3

Come again?

"The need [the recess appointments clause] was designed to fill no longer exists"

That what Scalia wrote about it. What's to stop future courts from using that same logic on other clauses to the Constitution and it's Amendments?

Can you explain why he is wrong?

Or should I just assume you are?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"The need [the recess appointments clause] was designed to fill no longer exists"

"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."

What's to stop future courts from deciding others needs the Constitution was designed to fill "no longer exist".

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.

ARTICLE II, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 3

Come again?

Your delusions to cognitive adequacy continue.

The ruling is a limitation on the Constitution itself.

How does SCOTUS decided the need no longer exists.

Let me explain how SCOTUS can decide that.

They didn't decide that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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??????

In Scalia's opinion.

You mean in Scalia's dissent, but keep showing how stupid you are.

 

[Peach]

A minor procedural mistake that President Obama will no doubt never make again now that the Supreme Court has finally clarified the confusion surrounding the recess appointment rule.

Tea Party zealots, of course, will harp on this as evidence that President Obama is an evil dictator who usurps power, tramples the Constitution, etc., despite the fact that he hasn't done anything like this since the Court's decision. Our President respects the Constitution, conservatards--get that through your thick skulls.

Several recent Presidents have made intrasession "recess" appointments; yes, the Court clarified. A 4-5 day break for a holiday is not a recess in which appointments can be made by ANY President, without Congressional approval, as set forth in applicable Constitutional provisions and law(.)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

In Scalia's opinion.

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..

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?

Tell me something, genuius, when was the last time a vacancy occurred during a recess of Congress?

When the Constitution was written there were months between sessions, now, at the most, there are a couple of weeks. Even if someone died on the first day of a recess of two weeks, it would take the President longer than two weeks to even figure out who to appoint for the position.

Want to explain why Scalia is wrong, given that technology allows the President to get Congress back in session in a day if there is a real emergency?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

how President Obama "usurped the US Constitution" in the matter of NLRB recess appointments

(yawn) He made "recess appointments" when the Senate was not in recess....

The Senate was in recess.

Republicans were pulling a bullshit trick by keeping it open.

There was one guy there and nothing happening.

Careful what you wish for, by the way. It's not always going to be a Democratic President.

Yet Obama signed a bill into law that was passed during that bullshit session. How could he do that if they were actually in recess? Maybe that law is unconstitutional too.

As for wishes, I wish the minority opinion had won. That would stop all recess appointments unless the vacancy occurred during the recess, just like the Constitution actually says.

 

[bodecea]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has limited a president's power to make temporary appointments to fill high-level government jobs.The court said Thursday that President Barack Obama exceeded his authority when he invoked the Constitution's provision on recess appointments to fill slots on the National Labor Relations Board in 2012.

News from The Associated Press

according to ACLJ are now null and void because the window was too short-3 days, and they said they were in session.

Ok...the system works. Glad to hear it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

A minor procedural mistake that President Obama will no doubt never make again now that the Supreme Court has finally clarified the confusion surrounding the recess appointment rule.

Tea Party zealots, of course, will harp on this as evidence that President Obama is an evil dictator who usurps power, tramples the Constitution, etc., despite the fact that he hasn't done anything like this since the Court's decision. Our President respects the Constitution, conservatards--get that through your thick skulls.

A procedural mistake? Obama overstepped his bounds. Even Ruth Ginsburg agreed with the Conservative Justices that Obama willfully flouted the Constitution. It is utterly bemusing to sit here and watch folks like you continue to defend the man even AFTER the Supreme Court sets him in his place. Lemmings the lot of you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Kind of a no brainer on this one. Not surprised it's unanimous. The President doesn't have the right to declare the Senate out of session for the sole purpose of making illegal recess appointments.

And he was usurping the Constitution by trying to appoint people without Senate confirmation while the Senate was in session

The filibuster isn't constitutional.

Perhaps that should go away completely.

Closing down government is not in the constitution as well. Neither is a debt ceiling.

Hopefully this "usurping" of the Constitution goes away too.

Can you prove to me why it isn't Constitutional? Or are you simply an idiot?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Here's a little homework.

Lookup both the debt ceiling and filibuster in the constitution.

Feel free.

Even an "originalist" like Scalia knows they aren't there.

By the way, the court took a dangerous step here.

The usual big-govt-addict dodge, trying to pretend that for anything to be legal it must be written in the Constitution.

Did the Constitution say it was OK for you to tie your shoes this morning?

You're under arrest.

Now the Constitution is a living, breathing document?

Man..you guys must get whiplash with all those flip flops.

The conservatives aren't the ones that said the Constitution doesn't apply, it was the liberals. That is why the President can still make recess appointments, as long as Congress is in recess.

But feel free to keep whinging about something you don't understand.

 

[BlindBoo]

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??????

In Scalia's opinion.

You mean in Scalia's dissent, but keep showing how stupid you are.

No the article specifically said it was his own opinion. If it was a 9-0 decision how could it be, as you claim, a dissenting opinion?. I was responding to a post that had that quote in it. #43 I think.

 

[Ibentoken]

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.

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.

Harry Reid needs to end the filibuster of appointments once and for all.

Harry Reid needs his nose adjusted and his lying ass tossed in jail. JMHO.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

In Scalia's opinion.

You mean in Scalia's dissent, but keep showing how stupid you are.

No the article specifically said it was his own opinion. If it was a 9-0 decision how could it be, as you claim, a dissenting opinion?. I was responding to a post that had that quote in it. #43 I think.

Because there was a 5-4 split on how much to limit the recess appointment power.



Maybe you should learn to read, if it isn't too late.