Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS to Decide Landmark Recess Appointment Case
Townhall.com ^ | January 11, 2014 | Fred Wszolek

Posted on 01/11/2014 7:49:18 AM PST by Kaslin

In the coming days, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Noel Canning versus the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). This case arose when President Obama made several so-called recess appointments to the Board on January 4, 2012 when the Senate was not formally in recess. This landmark case is expected to determine how much leeway the President has to make appointments without Senate confirmation, and more significantly, it will have serious implications on the broader powers of the presidency itself and the system of checks and balances.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit already correctly ruled that these appointments were unconstitutional. The most significant reason President Obama’s actions are inconsistent with the law is the NLRB “recess” appointments were made when the U.S. Senate was in continuous “pro forma” sessions, meaning that the Senate was not actually in recess. The President merely declared that Senate was in recess and arrogated himself the authority to make the appointments.

The court’s findings show that President Obama has set a very dangerous precedent by completely bypassing the traditional nomination process and circumventing the Senate’s constitutional authority to advise and consent. The framers never intended for any president to have the unilateral power to appoint people to high-level positions except during a legitimate recess; hence, the U.S. Constitution specifically included a clause that gave the Senate the power to give its "advice and consent" to presidential appointments. As many of our county’s students learn, the framers created a system of checks and balances, for the purpose of avoiding presidential overreach.

President Obama effectively circumvented the Senate’s advice and consent, preventing any due process from taking place. In fact, two nominees failed to complete a Senate committee’s basic questionnaire that would have disclosed potential conflicts of interest, let alone the scrutiny of testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. This vetting should and quite possibly would have disqualified Obama’s nominees from taking office in the first place.

Then-nominees and now-General Counsel Richard Griffin and Board Member Sharon Block, Obama’s two recess appointments in question, have a dubious past of advocacy on behalf of the unions and in some instances a much more sordid history. Most notably, Richard Griffin was previously a lawyer for one of the country’s largest labor unions and according to The Wall Street Journal was “named as a defendant in a federal racketeering lawsuit that claims he was complicit in covering up a union embezzlement.” On the other hand, Sharon Block worked as a labor counsel for one of organized labor's most partisan supporters and has routinely sided with them in matters before the Board. Griffin and Block’s close ties to Big Labor is categorically defined as a conflict of interest at a federal agency where the government is supposed to act as an impartial arbiter between businesses and unions.

When the National Labor Relations Board was first constituted by Congress, George Meany, the former president of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO), was vociferously against the appointment of labor lawyers who had represented either unions or employers because he believed that they would not be able to act neutrally.

Times have changed and President Obama is completely beholden to his union boss friends, which ultimately led him down this disasterous path, including nominating someone to the Board who came directly from organized labor. The President, a former constitutional law professor, knows better and his actions are those of someone exhibiting willful ignorance. More significantly it is a breach and overstep of presidential powers that our Founding Fathers sought to protect our country from.

When outside influences and special interest groups are able to successfully infiltrate the government and exert their influence over elected officials in a quest to seek preferential labor policies, it is bad for business and bad for our country. While the Supreme Court should certainly strike down Obama’s appointments as unconstitutional, it is not enough. Congress must go a step further, and take it upon itself to reform the NLRB, so that the Board and its members cannot carry the water of the President’s political donors as opposed to functioning as a reputable, taxpayer-funded independent agency, which it falsely claims to be.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: labor; nlrb; recessappointment; supremecourt

1 posted on 01/11/2014 7:49:18 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

No surprises here. I believe we all know how this will turn out.


2 posted on 01/11/2014 7:52:49 AM PST by PowderMonkey (WILL WORK FOR AMMO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Fine, but the fact that this kind of thing is even an issue shows that we are now a third world banana republic, just with more stuff on the shelves.


3 posted on 01/11/2014 7:54:31 AM PST by jiggyboy (Ten percent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Please God. Restore the intelligence, fair-mindedness, common sense, love for country that once not that long ago lived within the spirit, sense of purpsose that was the Supreme Court of the United States of America.


4 posted on 01/11/2014 7:55:33 AM PST by lbryce (Obama:The Worst is Yet To Come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

When one black-robed renegade in Utah “legalized” same-sex marriage, it was immediately effected before a final SCOTUS decision, and now the Feds say they will recognize those “marriages.”

But when every court short of SCOTUS rules these appointments unconstitutional, the illegal Obamabots are allowed to remain in place till SCOTUS acts, and continue to destroy the nation.

The lesson? Whatever the left wants is what we get. Common sense, decency and integrity are all dead in our legal system.


5 posted on 01/11/2014 7:57:11 AM PST by JTR1888
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey

Two years later and the damage is already done.

Glad to see the SCOTUS on top of things.


6 posted on 01/11/2014 8:00:26 AM PST by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal the 16th Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

They should just take down their lie above the Court:

“Equal under the Law”.

It is a lie - and never again will have been true in the USA.


7 posted on 01/11/2014 8:00:36 AM PST by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unixfox

What will happen to decisions made during the time the illegal appointees were in office?

Repeal?


8 posted on 01/11/2014 8:04:24 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FReepers

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

9 posted on 01/11/2014 8:13:07 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
It is sick and disgusting that it took over two years for the Supreme Court to decide this case!!!!

Banana Republic States of America

10 posted on 01/11/2014 8:14:43 AM PST by eeriegeno (<p>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Nothing like speedy justice.


11 posted on 01/11/2014 8:15:38 AM PST by DungeonMaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Roberts will decide “it’s a tax.”


12 posted on 01/11/2014 8:24:55 AM PST by eCSMaster ("It is not the color of his skin, ... it is the blackness that fills his soul")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

According to the law...nevermind, jon boi, will blow this one off and call it a tax, or a fine or a Thursday, it doesn’t matter, “At this point, what difference does it make?”.


13 posted on 01/11/2014 8:31:19 AM PST by USS Alaska (If I could...I would.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey
He's got a huge pile of EOs ready-to-go, and that's how we'll be "ruled" for the next few years.

"Mess wit me and I thump ya wid dese tings, America!

14 posted on 01/11/2014 8:37:01 AM PST by carriage_hill (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history, when everybody stands around reloading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The communists Democrat system has the Supreme Court included in it circle of King Obama’s team. If the Court upholds King Obama’s appointment then the proof is in that America is finished. We cannot depend on the House since it has nothing but a few patriots and the rest are impotent.
15 posted on 01/11/2014 8:37:04 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Big deal, it got to SCOTUS. I would imagine that the court will find against the appointment so as to maintain its false veneer of credibility and credibility in the current system overall. But this decision won’t matter, because we know that zero will march on undeterred. And we know that the regime will suffer absolutely no adverse consequence if the court goes against him anyways.
I think that it would be more interesting if the court agreed with the regime. That would engender even more contempt of these corrupt federal institutions which is exactly what they deserve. So now we see zero routinely breaking the law, NSA officials lying to congress w/o consequence; why should the people behave any differently? If this is not the perfect justification for mass civil disobedience, I don’t know what is.


16 posted on 01/11/2014 8:39:25 AM PST by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est. New US economy: Fascism on top, Socialism on the bottom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Principled

I didn’t know this was a discussion on POTUS...er...


17 posted on 01/11/2014 8:40:04 AM PST by logi_cal869
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Principled

SCOTUS is afraid to piss off Der Fuhrer. I am counting on them to do absolutely nothing.


18 posted on 01/11/2014 8:51:40 AM PST by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal the 16th Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey

YEP and I am sure Obama will threaten Roberts again unless he votes a certain way....


19 posted on 01/11/2014 9:09:36 AM PST by Engedi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

As with most other Freepers here, I have no confidence in the Supreme Court upholding the Constitution. It will apply the rubber stamp 0bama expects of the good little black-robed monkey boys and girls they are. The Constitution is dead, as the current president recognizes no restraint on his power as against the other branches of government, the states, or the people.


20 posted on 01/11/2014 9:18:49 AM PST by henkster (Communists never negotiate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Since the Constitution makes clear beyond the shadow of a doubt that RECESS appointments can only be made when Congress is officially in RECESS, how could the Supreme Court rule otherwise?

Maybe the Justices are finally tired of being members of a Court that is only ONE of the worst Supreme Courts in history and instead wants to officially secure its place as THE worst Supreme Court in history.

It would be hard for the Roberts Court to displace at the very bottom of the heap the infamous Supreme Court that in the 1850s ruled against Dred Scott, thereby touching off the Civil War.

However, the Roberts Court already has ONE inane and destructive ruling to its discredit — its support of ObamaCare — so a clearly unconstitutional ruling allowing recess appointments to be made when Congress in NOT in recess could provide just the additional weight of injustice necessary to tip the scales in securing the Robert’s Court the prize of worst Supreme Court that America has ever had to endure.


21 posted on 01/11/2014 10:26:31 AM PST by Bluestocking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
In the fwiw department, Boeing has standing.

5.56mm

22 posted on 01/11/2014 10:29:12 AM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bluestocking
If you had paid attention then would know that Chief Justice Roberts only agreed once with that arrogant pos occupant of the Spite House and it wasn't on the entire health care bill. If you can find more then prove it and post them to me. Otherwise sthu. I am tired of you JRDS
23 posted on 01/11/2014 10:41:53 AM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
According to the link Here the case was docketed on April 25, 2013
24 posted on 01/11/2014 10:51:21 AM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: eeriegeno
See Post #24

From April 24, 2013 when the case was docketed to January 13, 2014 is less then 9 (nine) month not two years

25 posted on 01/11/2014 11:00:35 AM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe

How does Boeing have standing?


26 posted on 01/11/2014 2:44:53 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe

How does Boeing have standing?


27 posted on 01/11/2014 2:44:53 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey
No surprises here. I believe we all know how this will turn out.

Yep - the act will be labeled a "tax" and therefore totally legit, no matter where it originated or what it was called.

28 posted on 01/12/2014 2:23:35 AM PST by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: livius
Good morning.

How does Boeing have standing?

Boeing was injured when the unconstitutional appointment allowed the NLRB to proceed against Boeing's 777 plant outside Charleston. [Preventing them from opening]

I should have said, "I think," they have standing, because I believe the injury has now been rectified.

5.56mm

29 posted on 01/12/2014 5:33:01 AM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson