I almost hope he would try something that insane. It might be the one ting that could unite a conservative movement that does not appear to be on speaking terms with itself.
Obama can appoint himself Emperor of the Moon.
Who knew there was a expiration date on Advice and Consent
Seems to me the Senate has provided their advice: “we will not consider this nomination until after the election.”
Goodness, you must have faith in the U.S. Republican representatives that their records thus far do not merit.
Didn’t the Court already shoot down this line of sophistry when they canned Obama’s NLRB recess appointments?
Under the 20th Amendment, the new Congress takes office on January 3. The new President does not take office until January 20.
If the Democrats retake the Senate (which appears likely at this point), then it does not matter who is elected President. Senate Majority Leader Chuckie Schumer will have almost three weeks to easily push through on a party line vote all of Obama's nominees, from the Supreme Court to the district courts along with the FEC and any other federal agencies. There will not be a damned thing that the minority Republicans can do to stop it.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
He has ignored the Constitution for 7+ years, why observe it now? Establishment Republicans would cower in the corner if he even looked at them.
Dear Mr Diskant and WaPo,
Senate advice and consent is not a ‘right’.
It is a POWER.
An appointment can only be made:
by the advice of the Senate
by the consent of the Senate
with the advice of the Senate
with the consent of the Senate
A presidential appointment is impossible except by means of the Senate’s consent, and only if the President action is together WITH the Senate’s consent.
That's irrefutable.
What if the four sane (allegedly) justices refused to accept such an illegal appointee? If Roberts just said “...NO, we aren’t going to seat this illegal appointee...” what could Obummer do?
This is where he really goes off the rails. There is nothing in the constitution to suggest that a "vote" is necessary to withhold consent. Congress' refusal to act is, by definition, a withholding of consent.
> ote that the president has two powers: the power to “nominate” and the separate power to “appoint.” In between the nomination and the appointment, the president must seek the “Advice and Consent of the Senate.
What absolute nonsense. Claiming that the “president must seek [] the consent of the senate” is an outright blatant lie. The President must HAVE the consent of the Senate.
He is out of his cotton picking mind.
> It is altogether proper to view a decision by the Senate not to act as a waiver of its right to provide advice and consent.
More garbage. The Senate has not consented, there is no requirement that they provide hearings for any nominee in order to make their determination.
Obama can recess appoint him like Ike did Brennan
Brennan stayed
Obamas could likely be temporary
This guy’s an idiot. No. He can’t. He can do an interim if the Senate is in recess but that’s it.
What moron wrote this article? This is as stupid as the one where the guy said a dead Scalia could still vote.