Posted on 09/24/2020 5:29:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
The United States Constitution, at Article II, Section 2, Clause 3, provides that [t]he 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."
In other words, the Constitution allows the president to make recess appointments, which are temporary, but effective, while the Senate is in recess.
This includes the power to make recess appointments to the Supreme Court.
Why is there a need to do this?
Because this presidential election is a litigation fiasco waiting to happen, creating a compelling reason for a recess appointment, followed by permanent confirmation of the recess appointee. The Supreme Court does not need to be divided four-four on matters that might adjudicate a presidential election, not for one second longer than it needs to be.
Remember Bush v. Gore?
Well, 2020 is about to make 2000 look like a game of pattycake. This time, the Democrats seek a litigious game of "pin the tale on the donkey," hoping that at the end of the day, some federal court will pin the presidency upon their stumbling, blinded candidate, boosted by their constantly changing election rules and their unverifiable mail-in voting schemes full of the potential for fraud, mistakes, and inaccuracy.
But does history support such a move — a recess appointment to the Supreme Court?
You bet it does.
A dozen times, presidents have made recess appointments of justices to the Supreme Court prior to Senate confirmation. Eleven out of twelve of those recess-appointed justices were ultimately confirmed by the Senate. Recess appointments have been made by some of the most revered presidents of the ages.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Maybe if confirmation fails, but why bother if he can simply get a great nominee confirmed? That’s a lot more permanent and leaves nothing to chance. This is the kind of shift in the Supreme Court that could last a generation.
McConnell has nor recessed at any time during Trump’s term to prevent him from doing any recess appointments.
Yeah you think a guy who writes for something called The American Thinker would have caught on to that fact.
Liberal heads WOULD EXPLODE!
No. Take the vote before the election. It is crucial. If RBG is doesn’t have a permanent replacement at election time the rats will come out of every hole, basement and sewer grate to vote. Nothing would bring them out like this would.
That has to go on the long-term To Do List.
A Constitutional Amendment requiring Congress to be in recess a certain number of days each year. Need to restore the balance of power between the branches.
I’m not against it, but that should be the absolute last resort, not the first option.
For one, I think the Dems/media would be able to use it against him rather effectively in the upcoming election. Second, recess appointments are not permanent and must be voted on by the Senate before the end of the next session anyway.
That is the worse idea I heard of in a very long time.
We have a process, let it work itself out.
Cannot believe a conservative would even suggest this.
The Constitution is clear: as long as Trump is in office at POTUS, he has the responsibility and DUTY to fill an empty SC seat, the the Senate has a responsibility and DUTY to “advise and consent”.
He needs to exercise this duty all the way up to Jan. 19th, 2021.
COUNTERPOINT: WHAT WOULD THE DEMS DO IN THE SAME SITUATION??? Of course - they would fill the seat. Why is no pundit making this point?
“McConnell has nor recessed at any time during Trump’s term to prevent him from doing any recess appointments.”
Exactly.
Trump should tell McConnell to get Trump’s nominee confirmed before the election or gavel the Senate into recess.
“Maybe if confirmation fails, but why bother if he can simply get a great nominee confirmed?”
If Barrett or Lagoa are the nominees, they will be approved. At this juncture, the rats would be committing political suicide if they go after the nominees faith.
Thank you, I thought that was the case, glad to see it confirmed.
At first blush I thought this was a bad idea, but I am rapidly warming up to it. 8>)
This is stupid. One, it’s not necessary. Two, the Senate hasn’t been recessed in years. Three, it would cause a never-ending firestorm of “illegitimacy”.
They are going to start having to give IQ tests to political pundits. The complete and utter cr@p I’ve seem lately is mind-boggling.
This argument should be moot. Nominate and approve before the election.
Another illeterate and uninformed author. The Senate doesn’t do recesses anymore. They do pro forma sessions. I’d hate to have Don Brown as my JAG officer doing any legal work if I was still active.
Correct.
Have hearings. LIMIT the time each Senator gets to speak.
The day after the Judicial Hearing ends, McConnel calls for a full vote on the Senate floor.
The day after that the new Justice is sworn in.
Totally legal. Nothing the Dems can do except WHINE.
Do it as quickly as possible.
This will demoralize the Dem support.
Republicans need to start acting like they won.
Hilarious!
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.