Skip to comments.Court casts doubt on Obama’s recess appointments
Posted on 12/05/2012 12:58:06 PM PST by Lmo56
A federal appeals court on Wednesday questioned not only President Obamas controversial January recess appointments but the entire system of such appointments, using oral arguments in a case to cast doubt on whether presidential powers can ever be exercised unless Congress has adjourned for good.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Why does court decisions matter to Obama? Republicans have been neutered and Obama disregards court decisions.
Yeah, they rolled forward just enough to no doubt go into overdrive in reverse.....
A federal appeals court means absolutely nothing to Obama and his democrats.
Article II Section 2. ". . . he shall nominate, and by with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers . . . "
Clearly, the President does not have plenary power to appoint his ministers. His appointments must pass muster under the watchful eyes of educated and experienced political men who represented the corporate interests of their states.
In the next para, "The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate . . . " This is an exception to Senate's regular consent power, IMO, under the unusual circumstance of say, the resignation or death of a sitting minister. It is not a loophole to be exploited by despots.
Our Framers knew well the potential abuse of the appointment power. When Obama flips the Senate the bird over appointments, its not just a bold violation the Constitution, it is the return of a despotic power our ancestors revolted against.
The judges were appointed by Pres. Regan, GHWB and GWB :)
In these cases, however, the Senate was not even in recess, regardless of the argument over the occurrence of the vacancy.
Pretty much moot at this point - those appointments expire with the end of the current Congress. Be careful which appeal is last when SCOTUS refuses to hear the case due to it being moot, notwithstanding the practice deserves to be ruled upon so another 12 month cycle does not ensue.
The recess appointment clause IMO was only intended to facilitate the smooth running of government on a temporary basis only when the Senate was out of town.
That is another example of the way the Left has abused the Constitution; the temporary terms expire at the end of the next Session, not the current Congress.
Both parties have abused this power, but Obama hit a new low.
Oh, I understood you on that - I just meant even with that - the Senate was not even in recess at all when he made the “recess” appointments.
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.