[Sopater]

[BenLurkin]

“When interpreting a constitutional provision, we must look to the natural meaning of the text as it would have been understood at the time of the ratification of the Constitution.”

[cripplecreek]

The NLRB says they intend to ignore the court ruling.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/nlrb-we-will-continue-to-act-despite-the-appeals-court-decision/article/2519736#.UQMDe_JU6vc

[tet68]

Ya hear that Bill Clinton, it all depends on the meaning
of “THE”.

Bwhahahahah.

[Political Junkie Too]

Three key passages in the Constitution governed the case.

Terry,

There is a fourth "key" passage that nobody is talking about.

Article I Section 5 Clause 4:

---

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.

---

Everyone is making a big deal about whether the Senate was in recess and whether Obama can decide when the Senate is in recess. However, the Constitution says that the House of Representatives gets to decide when the Senate is in recess, and the House did NOT consent. The House remained in session, forcing the Senate to conduct pro forma sessions.

People need to put more emphasis on the House's role in this. The Senate's pro forma sessions were not a "gimmick" that excuses Obama from acting unconstitutionally

-PJ

[jazusamo]

Please bump the Freepathon or click above and donate or become a monthly donor!

[Mastador1]

How dare they lecture the great and powerful ObamaOZ on the Constitution! Don’t they know that he taught Constitutional law? Note I said he taught it not that he had tiniest understanding of it. Maybe that’s the problem for Obama, he is used to just making sh*t up as he goes along with out question and now some people are calling him on it.

[so_real]

Is it  soup  treason yet?

[SERKIT]

How DARE that judge question the President! Doesn’t he know that Mr Soetoro was a law instructor specializing in Cloward Piven and he taught the excellent theory that the pesky Constitution is a “charter of negative liberties “?

[Intolerant in NJ]

It’s a start - now if we can nail Obama for illegally bankrupting the bondholders in his GM takeover, illegally violating courtorders to lift moratoria on Gulf oil drillig, illegally changing the definitions of work in the Welfare laws, and ignoring his duties in enforcing the immigration laws, we’ve got a strong case on impeachment for abuse of power......

[jwalsh07]

Good job Mark.

[etcb]

A vacancy that does not happen “during the Recess” cannot be filled by a recess appointment, said the judge.

Most of the discussion has been about whether the Senate was in recess at the time the appointments were made but I would argue that the above quotation is the most important aspect of this ruling. Congress was essentially a part time body when the Constitution was adopted and this provision was included to provide for continuity of government functions when the Senate was not physically present to consider appointments. When the Congress became a full time body, this provision became essentially meaningless.

[Tymesup]

Suppose “recess” means what Obama says it means - a lunch break, for example. If so, then the “session” starts when they come back in the afternoon. The “session” ends when they break for dinner - and so does the recess appointment.

[chrisnj]

“The NLRB says they intend to ignore the court ruling.”
They can ignore the ruling, but the businesses that they try to regulate can ignore the ‘board’ and/or even challenge them in court since the court has ruled that they have no authority to regulate the businesses at all!