Replies

why exactly would a president who controls both house and senate feel a need to recess appoint any nominee?

especially before he'd ever had confirmation hearings?

I don't think they read the "recess appointment" right in the first place. See underlined below

Art 2, Sect 2
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
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.

I think the vacancy must HAPPEN during the recess, and that all others are subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.

I don't recall the US Constitution having other places where word order is ignored. Anyone else know of any?

I would have written it this way to get the process we currently follow: "The president shall have the power DURING THE RECESS OF THE SENATE to fill up all vacancies that may have happened."

There's no doubt Obama did this to avoid "death panel" questions.