Skip to comments.NLRB: We will continue to act despite the Appeals Court decision
Posted on 01/25/2013 2:11:01 PM PST by sheikdetailfeather
Mark Gaston Pearce, chairman of the National Labor Relations Board, issued the following statement in reaction to todays DC Appeals Court decision that President Obama use of recess appointments to install three people on the NLRB last year was unconstitutional. The action renders the board without a quorum to act and potentially invalidates a years worth of actions and rulings by it. Pearce indicated that the NLRB will attempt to continue on regardless:
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Can someone please impeach this guy?
He could end up losing ObamaCare when it gets back to the Supremes if he keeps acting up.
Too bad the subject wasn’t the validity of Obama’s recess election when the people lost their collective minds.
Anyway, Invalidating the commisioners invalidates their actions. Next, Richard Cordray.
These court decisions are the “law of the land” and a settled issue when the liberals win.
I agree. The time is way overdue.
Fine Mark, and business shall ignore your worthless ass.
OOPs I forgot who we were talking about
Well, then, we shall just ignore Roe v Wade, and the Obamacare Supreme Court decision from last year.
WTF? I guess this means America’s tyrannical government is official. Executive branch’s self-proclaimed disconnect from the legislative and judicial branch is grounds for war, per the Constitution.
The Long March to dictatorship continues.
The constitution contemplates the political remedy of impeachment and removal from office. Not that Congress will do its job - it's failed miserably on that count, in many ways, for as long as I have been alive.
“The constitution contemplates the political remedy of impeachment and removal from office.”
The Second Amendment contemplates the same result but with a slightly different remedy.
There are also laws against operating a public nuisance...
I guess since the court didn’t issue a cease and desist order they’re technically correct.
Courts are too chicken to even try to enforce their rulings. It’s not the first time for Obama to ignore them.
There is one other option. The House can refuse to fund the NLRB. We’ll see if they have the spine for that. But this really is getting serious now. We have the Obama Admin standing in direct defiance and disrespect of the enumerated powers of the two other branches of government.
Well, now all the businesses affected by the NLRB can tell the NLRB to f*** off.
Didn’t 0bama ignore a Fed Court ruling ordering him to stop revoking oil drilling permits after the BP oil disaster too, and he ignored that also?
There's a difference between a Supreme Court decision and a Circuit Court decision. There is something of a circuit split (several different circuit splits, actually) regarding the question of when the Senate is in "Recess" for the purposes of the "Recess Appointments" clause. The DC Circuit's ruling in this case (that "Recess Appointments" apply only to appointments made during the recess between Congresses every two years, and that they only apply to vacancies that open up during that recess) was more restrictive of the President's power than most other decisions have been. The DC Circuit (unfortunately) did not enjoin the NLRB from acting with the disputed commissioners, which (again, unfortunately) means that the decision does not precent the NLRB from acting in other cases. Until the Supreme Court weighs in, the NLRB's position here is technically correct.
Yes Obama did ignore that court too.
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.