Posted on 06/26/2014 7:06:44 AM PDT by navysealdad
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
That is what I would think is in play here. Businesses which have been negatively impacted by NLRB rulings should be able to go to court and apply for relief from having to abide by the rulings the NLRB made, even if the Senate later approved the appointees.
The majority opinion is kind of scary - says that longstanding practice between the two branches + “the ballot box” are legitimate tools to interpret the meaning of plain English.
Scalia, Alito, and Thomas’ concurrence is much better - but it only got 3 votes.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday delivered a blow to President Barack Obama by cutting back the power of the White House to temporarily fill senior government posts without Senate approval.
In a ruling that will constrain future presidents, the court held on a 9-0 vote that the three appointments Obama made to the U.S. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in 2012 were unlawful. The decision limits the ability of presidents to make so-called recess appointments without Senate approval, although the court did not go as far as it could have gone in restricting a president’s powers.
The decision, written by Justice Stephen Breyer, could especially hamper the Obama administration if Republicans were to win control of the Senate in the November elections. They already control the House of Representatives. It also is likely to make it more difficult for the president to make appointments of his choosing during the last two years of his term.
Great—but the EPA gets to run rough-shod without checks and balances? Stupremes...
We have been done in by the cowardice of the GOPe once again.
Cowardice, or malfeasance?
Yes indeed a very large iceberg of corruption floating atop an apathetic sea.
For truly, this nation is full of apathetic morons who would rather be lazy with their own humanity, than do the hard work of answering the call to holiness, much less political truthfulness.
I have never so much wanted to be WRONG, as in what I predict in post 29. But sadly, I fear I’ll be proven right.
It’s not even worth it to call for revolution; no one will come for fear of missing the latest reality show.
Just as secession and the first shots by the democrat rebel scum was UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
You are probably thinking of the President Jackson comment: “[SC Justice] Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”
This was regarding the Indian policies of the Jackson era.
http://www.shmoop.com/jackson-era/law.html
Not until Monday.
They rejected a tighter, constitutional interpretation of the recess appointment power of the president by a 5-4 vote.
The constitution actually says that the president has the power to make recess appointments for vacancies that occur during the recess. The justices rejected the clear wording of the constitution’s grammar in favor of a reading that says “the president can make appointments during the recess for vacancies that have occurred.”
They also reject the less clear reading of the Constitution that there is only one annual recess of the Senate.
*Section. 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.**
***Section 5. 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. ***
Let them enforce it.
Obama will ignore it.
Obama said he made the appointments in the face of Republican refusal to allow the NLRB to function.
Still playing the blame game....but....that DOES NOT give him the right to violate the constitution any time he pleases.
You would think that being a supposed professor of constitutional law he would have SOME concept of what is written in the constitution.
Monday. Last day.
This is going to be so stressful on Obama that he may have to up his T-time by a couple of hours.
It seems to me, from reading here on Free Republic, that there are quite a few advocating for secession right now ... :-) ...
These particular advocates of that, on Free Republic, seem to think it’s entirely Constitutional.
Are they waking up to what this a**le is doing to this country?
I was aware of that one, when I made the statement about Lincoln. I have read it somewhere else about Lincoln, and when I read it, I also thought about your example.
Exactly! As important as this ruling is (and it's VERY important), it pales in comparison to the Hobby Lobby decision.
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.