The Senate has pro forma sessions planned to keep the lights on. Obama will not get away with a recess appointment. In fact, the Court smacked him down 9-0 when he tried one a few years ago.
Scalia died in his sleep. These conspiracy theories have to stop. It makes us look bad.
Highly unlikely after the scotus clarified what a “recess” is not too long ago.
Obama is a Curse on the US
My money is on him taking advantage of this and putting an Alinsky type in.
I thought the Senate stopped adjourning during the Bush administration jsut to prevent recess appointments.
The Senate is not in recess. A recess appointment is not a possiblity.
If the cases have already bee heard, the newly appointed justice couldn’t vote on them.
Floor Schedule
Friday, Feb 12, 2016
The Senate convened at 10:00 a.m. and adjourned at 10:18 a.m. No record votes were taken.
Monday, Feb 22, 2016
3:00 p.m.: Convene and proceed to the reading of Washington’s Farewell Address.
Thereafter, begin a period of morning business.
5:30 p.m.: Proceed to executive session to consider the nomination of Robert McKinnon Califf to be Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Department of Health and Human Services.
http://www.senate.gov/index.htm
every sentence that comes out of that creature’s mouth should end with - NOT. So expect them to appoint a justice without congress. There does not need to be 9 justices so if, God forbid, another justice does pass away or hopefully Ginsburg will retire, then 7 will be good.
As for the RINO’s doing anything but submitting to the threat of exposing their quirks in the FBI files...oh well. The majority of Americans vote for liars.
Could President Obama make a nominee during that recess? Only if the Senate is taking a recess lasting longer than three days, and does not come in from time to time during that recess to take some minimal legislative action. Both of those circumstances would be entirely within the Senate’s authority.
In that circumstance, a recess appointment to the Court would not be within the terms of the Constitution, as spelled out in Article II.
The same situation would likely apply when this year’s Senate session comes to an end, and the senators take a recess before the next Congress assembles.
The bottom line is that, if President Obama is to successfully name a new Supreme Court Justice, he will have to run the gauntlet of the Republican-controlled Senate, and prevail there. The only real chance of that: if he picks a nominee so universally admired that it would be too embarrassing for the Senate not to respond.
We are in this mess because corrupt Congress has stubbornly refused to impeach and remove lawless Obama from office.
From a related thread . . .
Corrupt federal lawmakers let any federal government official outside the legislative branch steal legislative powers from both the federal government and the states so that they can do Congresss unconstitutional legislative work for it.
By letting outsiders do their dirty work work for it, lawmakers keep their voting records clean to fool low-information patriots to reelect them, such voters clueless about the federal governments constitutionally limited powers.
My concern about the corrupt Senate confirming an Obama-nominated activist justice is this. Senators may try to keep their voting records clean by deliberately ”abdicating” their power to confirm a justice by going on recess in order to let Obama make a recess appointment.
Remember in November !
When patriots elect Trump, Cruz, or whatever conservative they elect, they need to also elect a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support the new president, but also protect the states from unconstitutional federal government overreach as the Founding States had originally established the Senate to do.
Also, consider that such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices confirmed by previous state sovereignty-ignoring senators.
Makes sense.
The Repubes laid down for ANYTHING he did, and NOTHING he did worked out. Unopposed means he can’t storm around with claims he was stopped.
BUT NOW MAYBE HE CAN..!
He’ll do this only to provoke the type of opposition that will make it logical to say he’d have been WONDERFUL, if not for all that rancorous Ultra-Conservative OPPOSITION..!!!!
He’s TOTALLY going to do this.
The Constitution says that recess appointments "shall expire at the End of their next Session." There are two sessions to each Congress, each session ending at the end of the year.
What is easily debatable (read: ripe for mischief) is the phrase "next session."
If the recent SCOTUS ruling is that "the recess" means the recess between sessions and not some holiday break (i.e., the August summertime in the swamp recess), then the "next session" is the one that is about to begin after an intersession break. The term of the recess appointment would be until the end of the year.
If "the recess" is interpreted to be the Article I 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.
which is what we're discussing now, then 1), is it Constitutional, and 2), does "next session" mean the one after this one concludes?
Regardless of how the definitions of "the recess" and "next session" play out, the following should be the Republican strategy.
The next President should not wait for the recess-appointed Justice to step down at the end of 2017 to make his appointment.
The next President should make his permanent nomination early in 2017 and let the Senate confirm. Then, it will be up to the "lame duck" Justice to either succumb to pressure and step down early to let the duly confirmed Justice take over, or defiantly remain on the Court to the bitter end, when the earlier confirmed Justice will then be sworn in.
-PJ
![](http://s28.postimg.org/9a3qrz9al/Obama_and_Poindexter.jpg")
Nonsense!
Can’t be done.
Seems like he can appoint a successor at any time without senate approval. At that point if it’s challenged in court he’ll have a 5-4 win with the supremes.
And we know the house isn’t willing to challenge his illegal actions (e.g. impeachment) - they’re too busy trying to figure out how to pass Obama’s latest budget without taking responsibility.
Why does anyone even pretend the Constitution matters any more? It may matter to you and me. But in DC both sides see it as an “outdated and flawed document”.
I don’t think Obama will do a recess appointment.
I think he relishes a Summer of fighting over his nominee.
He will pick a black female. It will be a relentless onslaught of “Republicans are Racist! War On Women! Racist, Racist! War On Women!”
Either the Pubbies will cave, or he’ll be able to use this as a catalyst to get those voters who turned out for him twice to show up again this Fall.
you can bet Obama has his criminals at the White House working 24/7 to find a way to get what he wants