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 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-176 next last
To: navysealdad

He’ll do what he feels like anyway.


21 posted on 06/26/2014 7:24:55 AM PDT by headstamp 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek






Many Happy Returns of The Day!!

22 posted on 06/26/2014 7:25:01 AM PDT by MeshugeMikey ( "Never, never, never give up". Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus

I think Lincoln ignored a Supreme Court decision against him discarding Habeas Corpus.


23 posted on 06/26/2014 7:25:14 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 15 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

24 posted on 06/26/2014 7:25:33 AM PDT by Red Badger (I've posted a total of 2,743 threads and 84,837 replies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Obama already planning a workaround solution no doubt.


25 posted on 06/26/2014 7:25:38 AM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

26 posted on 06/26/2014 7:26:41 AM PDT by Red Badger (I've posted a total of 2,743 threads and 84,837 replies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mn-bush-man

Jay Sekulow on FOX now saying the same thing.


27 posted on 06/26/2014 7:27:28 AM PDT by Rusty0604
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad; All

By a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court agreed that the Senate was not in recess, holding that it’s up to both houses of Congress to define when they’re in session or in recess. As a result of the decision, the Senate can frustrate a president’s ability to make recess appointments simply by holding periodic pro forma sessions, a tactic used in recent years by both political parties.

The question, the court said, is whether the Senate had the capacity to act. It found that during the recess at issue, the court did have that power.

The stakes were no longer as high as they were when the case first came to the Supreme Court, given that the Senate has now agreed that a president’s nominations need only 51 votes for confirmation.


28 posted on 06/26/2014 7:27:42 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Wonderful.

Now the question really is, (it shouldn’t be but is): what are we going to do about it?

Will his recess appointments be voided? They should be, but WILL they?

I strongly suspect the following will now take place: the Obama administration will merely ignore this ruling and take no action to remove the recess appointments in question from office.

Then, everyone on the Hill will take precisely ZERO action to remove the appointments themselves. If they even try they will prove themselves “racist”.

And so, life under the regime goes on. Case closed! Thanks for your opinion on the matter Supreme Court, it was neat! Maybe next time he won’t do it again, maybe he will though. After all, again, no one will stop him; no one will force him to answer for his crimes.

Go back to watching your American Idol America! Nothing to see here!


29 posted on 06/26/2014 7:28:08 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604
...Wonder if that means all the rules made by NLRB at that time will be voided.

That's my question - this would be large.

30 posted on 06/26/2014 7:28:58 AM PDT by Principled (Obama: Unblemished by success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rusty0604
Wonder if that means all the rules made by NLRB at that time will be voided.

Completely irrelevant...because of the deal cut by Mitch McConnel over the filibuster rule, all those appointments have been approved by the Senate. Anything they did that may have been thrown out, they will simply re-approve.

We have been done in by the cowardice of the GOPe once again.
31 posted on 06/26/2014 7:29:37 AM PDT by rottndog ('Live Free Or Die' Ain't just words on a bumber sticker...or a tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
Constitutionally, Obama's a sitting duck in a shooting gallery that a blind man could hit.

Hoping that somewhere along the line, rulings and Congressional acts will force major reversals and undo much of what Obama has done.

32 posted on 06/26/2014 7:29:40 AM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat; Star Traveler

In a popular quotation that is probably apocryphal, President Andrew Jackson reportedly responded: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” This derives from Jackson’s consideration on the case in a letter to John Coffee, “...the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate,” (that is, the Court’s opinion because it had no power to enforce its edict).[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcester_v._Georgia


33 posted on 06/26/2014 7:29:53 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
Constitutionally, Obama's a sitting duck in a shooting gallery that a blind man could hit.

Hoping that somewhere along the line, rulings and Congressional acts will force major reversals and undo much of what Obama has done.

34 posted on 06/26/2014 7:29:56 AM PDT by PapaNew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad
The Supreme Court has limited a president's power to make temporary appointments to fill high-level government jobs.

Slanted headlines anybody?

He never had the authority in the first place. The Supremes just affirmed he was acting outside of his authority.

35 posted on 06/26/2014 7:30:03 AM PDT by oldbrowser (We have a rogue government in Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

All of the rules they made are void, and I want whatever salary etc they were paid returned.


36 posted on 06/26/2014 7:30:34 AM PDT by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: navysealdad

Every damned one of the recess appointments should immediately resign, and every damned “order” issued by these illegal appointments must be immediately revoked.


37 posted on 06/26/2014 7:30:34 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronaldus Magnus III

Exactly. See my post 29.


38 posted on 06/26/2014 7:30:38 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

Lincoln definitely ignored a US Supreme Court decision against him, in which they said his actions were UNCONSTITUTIONAL. And he was a Republican, I believe ... :-) ...


39 posted on 06/26/2014 7:31:55 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 20 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

“..........Obama exceeded his authority when he invoked the Constitution’s provision on recess appointments.......”....

And the penalty for that is..................?


40 posted on 06/26/2014 7:32:14 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-176 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