Posted on 02/14/2016 4:03:05 PM PST by RummyChick
As speculation swirls over whom President Obama could nominate to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, the White House is ruling out the possibility of an appointment while the Senate is out of town.
"Given that the Senate is currently in recess, we don’t expect the President to rush this through this week, but instead will do so in due time once the Senate returns from their recess," White House Principal Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz told ABC News. "At that point, we expect the Senate to consider that nominee, consistent with their responsibilities laid out in the United States Constitution."
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
And when you see that word adjourned in that post..remember they used it with recess.
“That when the Senate recesses or adjourns on any day from Thursday, February 11, 2016, through Saturday, February 20, 2016, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until 12:00 noon on Monday, February 22, 2016, or such other time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; . . .”
Maybe something has warned them that this would be playing with a kind of fire that they have never played with before?
Whether Obama can appoint a Justice to the Supreme Court hinges on that weirdly worded resolution.
The fate of immigration could hinge on the way they interchanged recess and adjournment
If you believe this ish, I have some forest land in Death Valley that might interest you as well.
Plausible. Soros pulling some strings and saying let Hillary or Bernie pick the next one??
It’s fascinating to me.
What’s next on the list to ratchet up the stakes of this political cycle? Ginsburg dying?
So this sounds like it depends on a choice to do one or the other... it can choose to recess or it can choose to adjourn... ?
Maybe. I am going to see if I can see how they have worded a previous recess
Also because the spectacle it would produce, would do more to sell the GOP to the public than anything else. He’d get his recess appointment as well as the most vigorous kick out the door the Democrats have ever seen in their lives. And then either Trump or Cruz would get to name the permanent replacement.
Might be boiler plate and what they actually did, depends on a voice vote at the time.
If the Senate goes on recess for 5 seconds, obozo would do it.
In 2015
That
“when the Senate recesses or adjourns on any day from Friday, March 27, 2015, through Monday, March 30, 2015, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Monday, April 13, 2015, or such other time on that day as may be specified by its Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.”
This must be a rope-a-dope. What’s the Kenyan got up his sleeve?
So did the White House have an agreement like they have had in the past:(adjourn means recess here)
“Without any fanfare, the Senate on Tuesday cleared a resolution so that both chambers could officially adjourn for the August recess.
The resolution allows the House and Senate to adjourn until Sept. 8 without any need for pro forma sessions. Under the Constitution, neither chamber can recess for more than three days without consent of the other.
A senior Senate GOP aide said the White House and Senate Republicans had reached an agreement that no recess appointments would be made during the adjournment. In years past, the minority party has been reluctant to allow such a lengthy adjournment in case the president makes recess appointments while the Senate is not in session.
Your *friend* is nuts. An appointment by Obama, temporary or permanent, is something the country must avoid at all costs.
I believe that I understand it quite well. The Senate has declared a conditional adjournment. The conditions are that the Senate will called into session every day except the weekends (Thursday - Tuesday - this is Washington after all). The Senate has appointed certain Senators to authorized certain actions during these pro forma sessions.
The Senate does not stand in recess.
So, the contents of the motion would determine which.
We need to find out what the motion was this year.
Assuming the appropriate motion was moved.
They would have been very STUPID to move anything but adjournment anyhow, given other judicial shenanigans by Obama.
NO NO NO. A thousand times no. It was a concurrent resolution. House agreed. No pro forma sessions. NADA. NOPE. Not happening.
Read this article using the words adjourn and recess.
It’s housekeeping stuff, routine business. It’s spelled out in the Resolution.
Look at the age distribution of the Associate Justices. Scalia was not the oldest. The next President (My out-of-the-box guess for the Democrat nominee is Biden or Bloomberg) will get to appoint 3 or 4, depending. If the stars all align for the Democrats, they could pick up the Senate, too.
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.