Justice memo argues Obama recess appointments were legal

The Hill ^ | 01/12/12 12:32 PM ET | Alexander Bolton

[Sopater]

The Department of Justice offered a defense on Thursday for President Obama’s controversial decision to make several recess appointments while Congress was in pro forma sessions.

In a memo, Justice argued the pro-forma sessions held every third day in the Senate do not constitute a functioning body that can render advice and consent on the president’s nominees. It said the president acted consistently under the law by making the appointments.

[Sopater]

This also just in... the fox says that there is nothing to worry about in the hen house.

[HiTech RedNeck]

The Senate should say “well, you never asked us for a vote.” Was Obama’s pants on fire? What’s next, going over the Senate’s head if it can’t get around to voting on one of these czars for a couple weeks?

[musicman]

Help End The Obama Era In 2012
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[2ndDivisionVet]

Most criminals think the world owes them a living, too.

[Abby4116]

I thought that the house decides when the senate can adjourn (per the constitution).

[massgopguy]

The Executive Branch can now write the rules of the Senate. Separation of Powers anyone?

[aquila48]

“Justice memo argues Obama recess appointments were legal”

Isn’t that the same as saying: “Obama argues Obama recess appointments were legal”

Or

“Holder argues Obama recess appointments were legal”

[drpix]

From the same Holder-DOJ that "argues" that below is NOT voter intimidation:

[drpix]

As in the Black Panther Voter Intimidation case, the memo was written by the same Holder-DOJ racist liars whose analysis goes no farther than: if your black you're innocent!

But facts show that Harry REID did the same pro forma sessions every three days to prevent BUSH from making recess appointments during three different Senate breaks - and BUSH made no appointments during those breaks.

Here's the conclusive proof from the public policy research arm of the United States Congress ("Congress's think tank").

CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE REPORT TO CONGRESS
[ Updated March 12, 2008, Order Code RS21308, LINK ]

"How Long Must the Senate Be in Recess Before a President May Make a Recess Appointment?"

"The Constitution does not specify the length of time that the Senate must be in recess before the President may make a recess appointment. Over the last century, as shorter recesses have become more commonplace, the Department of Justice has offered differing views on this issue. Most recently, in 1993, a Justice Department brief implied that the President may make a recess appointment during a recess of more than three days. On at least three occasions, the Senate has used procedural tools to prevent the occurrence of a recess of more than three days for the stated purpose of preventing such appointments: the 2007 Thanksgiving holiday period, the period between the first and second sessions of the 110th Congress, and the 2008 Presidents Day holiday period. In each of these cases, the Senate {under Harry Reid} met in pro forma sessions (during which no business was to be conducted) every three or four days over the course of what otherwise would have been a longer Senate recess. The President {Bush} made no recess appointments during these periods."

[Renkluaf]

Let's see, either chamber of Congress can have only two states: 1) in session; and 2) in recess. If, as the Constitution states, neither chamber can be in recess without the consent of the other and the House hasn't given its consent, THEN ITS IN SESSION.

Don't need 23 pages for that!

[Jane Long]

Welllllll, if the Dept. of Just Us says it's all okay, then that settles it.

At least that's what the GOP seems to be thinking and supporting.

[Liberty Valance]

[Nachum]

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/

[bravo whiskey]

bear woods
pope catholic

[Sopater]

Don't need 23 pages for that!

Amen! Me thinks they dost protest too much!

[Political Junkie Too]

Does this mean that Justice lied to SCOTUS when they argued the opposite in 2009?

-PJ

[fella]

None dare call it treason.

[bgill]

Yada, yada, yada. Just more CYA for Hussien.

[VikingMom]

I just called Boehner’s office to ask what specific legal remedies the Speaker intends to take against the Executive branch for their illegal, un-Constitutional actions. No big surprise - “The Speaker believes that the President has overreached his authority in making these appointments but he has not yet determined what course of action to take.”

I told the aide that the American people have already seen Boehner stomp his feet and cry and we’d like something a little more forceful this time. I said that if he won’t immediately freeze all funds to the Executive Branch than we have to assume he is either incompetent or corrupt, but either way he doesn’t deserve the office he holds and maybe we should start investigations against him!

Doubt that it will help - there must be a special machine in DC that remove the testicles of Republicans as soon as they arrive!

[Qbert]

"The Justice department's Office of Legal Counsel has released its memo justifying President Obama's controversial recess appointments. The first thing I noticed was the date. The appointments were made on Jan. 4. The memo is dated Jan. 6."

http://www.tnr.com/blog/timothy-noah/99576/justice-calls-recess-part-1