Posted on 01/25/2013 8:03:48 AM PST by green iguana
In this scenario you have not demonstrated that you have been harmed.
The problem is when courts will not acknowledge that if a President is not qualified to hold the office then EVERYONE is harmed and therefore, ANYONE, should be able to bring suit. Thus, the interpretation of “standing” is where we have our beef.
Agreed. Hence my sarcasm.
Bump for Luntz. :-)
not going to be an easy bet, but like a lot of people said here, i say yes. 
I think the NLRB is like other agencies such as the FCC; its “final decisions” are appealable by statute to the DC Circuit. No trial court would be involved in that event.
Here is a link to the slip opinion:
The decision below was by an administrative law judge. So, yes, you are correct, this decision is not an appeal from a District (Article III) Court.
This appears to be an issue of interpretation so clear that even Roberts will have difficulty ruling in the President’s favour. But of course we said that before Roberts decided that an acknowledged punitive fine was in reality a “tax”, even though Obama didn’t claim it was a tax. it will all depend on what the meaning of “arISe” IS.
Thanks for the link.
It will be interesting to see what Roberts does. I’m not entirely convinced that he has become “Obama’s guy,” but he certainly did act rather strangely on Obamacare, using tortured logic to uphold it.
I thought at the time that he was under some kind of pressure, which of course would not have abated since then.
I work on a lot of legal documents from Latin America, where several countries took a hard lurch to the left a few years ago, and one of the first objectives of every single one of these dictators, from Chavez on down, was to take over the judiciary and undermine its independence.
Sometimes this meant going so far as to arrest the judges and charge them either with made up crimes or with subversive activities, but in many cases it was simply done by intimidation, ridicule and harassment of the judges, in addition to their reassignment and replacement by others friendly to the regime. There was usually also a steady erosion of judicial powers by legislative means, often including rewriting or amending the national constitution.
Keep your eye on this issue.
Doesn’t that mean that all the rules and decisions they have made since their appointment are void?
The only thing that binds SCOTUS is its own imagination.
I’m no lawyer, but since they vacated the Board’s ruling in this case, it certainly seems that way.
It does, but I don't know (for sure) what steps or how other parties will obtain relief. I assume they have to sue for a judgment, just like Canning did.
Also of interest, there are many Article III judges whose appointments are unconstitutional, too. It's a fairly big can of worms.
Thanks for the response. I recognize you as one of the leading legal beagles on FR.
The NLRB has no enforcement mechanism outside of the judiciary.
Flies either like dead things or piles of crap. Take your pick....I think he literally outright stinks just like his daughters said. Muslims use their left hands to wipe the butts. He probably forgot to wash it.
“Because the Senate will never convict him”
True but irrelevant. The House should forget politics and just do its job. Some of the crap he has already done is impeachable in my view but perhaps hard to defend in the court of public opinion. However this matter is much clearer and much easier to defend. Obama should be impeached over this.
I believe it very likely that the Supreme Court will refuse to hear this case; that they will consider it an “argument between branches of the government” that they will not wish to get involved in any further than necessary.
I predict this will stand as is for now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.