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

Skip to comments.

HIGH COURT LIMITS PRESIDENT'S APPOINTMENTS POWER
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_RECESS_APPOINTMENT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-06-26-10-05-24 ^

Posted on 06/26/2014 7:06:44 AM PDT by navysealdad

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has limited a president's power to make temporary appointments to fill high-level government jobs.

The court said Thursday that President Barack Obama exceeded his authority when he invoked the Constitution's provision on recess appointments to fill slots on the National Labor Relations Board in 2012.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bhoscotus; executivepower; nlrb; recess; recessappointment; ruling; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-176 next last
To: navysealdad

Watch for some members of the S.C. mysteriously die now, so hussein can replace them with his own henchmen.


141 posted on 06/26/2014 9:25:16 AM PDT by Old Yeller (Anything is possible, if you don't know what you're talking about.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

And there there is CNN propaganda. Trying to make it sound like what Obama did was same thing that has been being done for years.


142 posted on 06/26/2014 9:26:17 AM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950

Texas has it written into their state constitution - they CAN secede.

Many people are ready to ‘escape’ to Texas should they ever do so. they ARE big enough, and successful enough - and have the ba*ls, to be separate.


143 posted on 06/26/2014 9:28:43 AM PDT by maine-iac7 (Christian is as Christian does - by their fruits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950
Where in the Constitution is there any explict right given to the states to secede? The states bound themselves to the Republic and the Constitution when they ratified the document or when they petitioned and were awarded statehood.

AMENDMENT X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Read that again. The states delegated specific powers to the Union through the Constitution. All other powers belong to the states.

All one need do is read the Founding Fathers' writings to understand their intentions. The Constitution was intended to grant limited power to the federal government. What they wanted to prohibit the states from doing, they specifically outlined in the Constitution. They intended all other powers and rights to go to the states and the people.

144 posted on 06/26/2014 9:36:45 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

so youre suggesting that the worst occupier of the oval office in the history of the republic ignore this ruling by the supreme court ?

and you find that amusing ?


145 posted on 06/26/2014 9:37:09 AM PDT by kingattax (a real American would rather die on his feet than live on his knees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

The important issue is does this SCOTUS decision *invalidate* all the decisions the NLRB made with its improper appointees? Unless it does, this is all for naught.


146 posted on 06/26/2014 9:40:22 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy ("Don't compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative." -Obama, 09-24-11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

He’s already doing it, so nothing has changed. AND ... the precedent is there for Presidents to ignore the US Supreme Court.

I figure the worse Obama is, the better it is for us the next time around, because the more upset people will be about it.


147 posted on 06/26/2014 9:56:49 AM PDT by Star Traveler (Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: The South Texan
“But knowing these clowns at the 1600 Penn Ave, they will ignore the Supreme Court and their media henchmen will applaud it”

Let the tanks roll, no issue with a Military coup at this point.

148 posted on 06/26/2014 10:02:18 AM PDT by DAC21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kabar; Red Badger

Obama later withdrew the nominations of the two whom he illegally appointed. He appointed two replacements, who, along with the three previously appointed and awaiting confirmation, were confirmed by the Senate on July 29, 2013.

Any decisions made by the board when the two served illegally are null and void. I believe there were some 800 decisions during that time.

Those on the board at this time are there legally and their decisions stand, unless later found specifically unconstitutional.


149 posted on 06/26/2014 10:21:10 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
A unanimous Supreme Smackdown of the Liberal Messiah's dictatorial appointments. Even His own appointments wouldn't back Him. If the Republicans take the Senate, His minions in His administration will be the only part of the federal government backing Him. The walls are closing in on Him; hopefully He'll snap soon.
150 posted on 06/26/2014 10:27:42 AM PDT by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7; RJS1950

That is a commonly believed myth. There is nothing in our state constitution about the right to secede.

In the 1845 annexation agreement, Texas agreed to join the union on the condition that it be allowed to split itself into as many as five separate states whenever it wanted to, and contingent only on the approval of its own state legislature. 


151 posted on 06/26/2014 10:33:12 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

what you said


152 posted on 06/26/2014 10:44:07 AM PDT by eartick (Been to the line in the sand and liked it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Not sure what got into the Supremes, but I like it..so far.


153 posted on 06/26/2014 10:49:57 AM PDT by leapfrog0202 ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery" Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

of course it’s unaminous. the liberal court wants to limit any future conservative president in 2016, and this ruling makes them appear objective right now.


154 posted on 06/26/2014 11:46:38 AM PDT by Tulsa Ramjet ("If not now, when?" "Because it's judgment that defeats us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

What difference, at this point, does it make?

155 posted on 06/26/2014 12:04:14 PM PDT by Old Sarge (TINVOWOOT: There Is No Voting Our Way Out Of This)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Right you are. One of the most important of all Supreme Court decisions. Everyone concerned with constitutional law should read it.


156 posted on 06/26/2014 12:28:03 PM PDT by paristexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Kenny

I have the same feeling.


157 posted on 06/26/2014 12:37:15 PM PDT by ColdOne (I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

“partisan clash”

Apparently, this had nothing to do with Constitutionally illegal behavior by a President as declared by a united Supreme Court in their first ever ruling on the issue. Nope, according to the AP this was a “partisan clash”.


158 posted on 06/26/2014 1:38:06 PM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus III
"And just what will make Obambi follow this ruling/decision?"

LOL! He doesn't need this any more! He made these recess appointments because they were being filibustered! Harry Reed changed the rules, remember? Big-0 will just re-nominate these guys and the Senate will confirm them easily.

159 posted on 06/26/2014 2:23:00 PM PDT by Da Bilge Troll (Defeatism is not a winning strategy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Democrats seem to think that every time a congressman goes to the White House Restroom, then it’s OK to appoint far left radicals to positions of higher power.


160 posted on 06/26/2014 3:02:23 PM PDT by Cruz_West_Paul2016
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160161-176 next last

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