The surprise, if there is one, is the delay in the Supreme Court’s acceptance and consideration of the case. The Obama administration appealed to the Supreme Court in March after the first decision, and the White House has obstinately refused to recognize the legal implications of the decision on the NLRB’s work throughout 2012. That creates a lot of confusion about compliance issues, which would seem to argue for rapid consideration rather than wait for months or perhaps more than a year for clarification.What does he have on them? It's clear he has nothing but disdain for the Supreme Court.
This should be addressed IMMEDIATELY (the illegal unconstitutional recess appointments,) it's a matter of utmost importance.
Putting it off for a year is putting it off until Obama is out of office.
But, but 0bama is a Constitutional Scholar! Why wouldn’t he know better than to try to do Unconstitutional things?
Bwaaa-Haa-Haa!!!! I totally crack myself UP...
To pick up this constitutionally arcane and politically laden issue suggests to me the Supremes are inclined to narrow if not outright eliminate the power grab of the executive branch through recess appointments
for later
The Supreme Court needs to buy a clue. The intent of presidential recess appointments was not to do an end around the confirmation process. It was to enable presidents to fill critical positions when congress was not reasonably available, as in days when travel was extremely time consuming.
In modern times, there is NO parallel requiring recess appointment power at all. If anything, the Senate has used an anti-constitutional rule itself to bring about any problem with appointments....the filibuster. The word is no place in the US Constitution. If anything, it is a cute by half amending of the Constitution that actually ruins the proper functioning of the government.