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

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-176 next last
To: cripplecreek
Slap!

He will ignore SCOTUS - this another thumbing by our royal dicktator to "WE THE PEOPLE", the Congress, and I am sure to the SCOTUS.

"I dare you to stop me, I am the first legitimate black p_Resident!!"
101 posted on 06/26/2014 8:07:14 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kenny

I don’t disagree. Sad when it’s come to the point where it’s even a possibility you’re about to lose your freedom of religion.


102 posted on 06/26/2014 8:07:19 AM PDT by Qiviut ( One of the most delightful things about a garden is the anticipation it provides. (W.E. Johns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Organic Panic

Let them enforce it.

Obama will ignore it.


Exactly. He knows they can’t enforce it, so he’s just laughing at this decision.


103 posted on 06/26/2014 8:07:31 AM PDT by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: kabar
Obama will expedite all appointments should the Reps gain control of the Senate in the midterms

They WON'T after what the GOP did in Mississippi last Tuesday.
104 posted on 06/26/2014 8:09:10 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Qiviut

The Hobby Lobby decision will come Monday.


105 posted on 06/26/2014 8:11:26 AM PDT by Red_Devil 232 ((VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950

Say anything you want about it ... it’s a ruling nonetheless and it was ignored. The precedent is there.


106 posted on 06/26/2014 8:12:00 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 98 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I agree that Reid will take immediate action to nuclear option the rest of [non-judicial] appts.

But I think he’ll consider it well. Any change will carry over to republican control eventually. He risks a lot by giving Rs the power he is desiring.

He may do it then change it back. That would be fun to watch. Everything he does helps the Tea Party and damages the GOPE.


107 posted on 06/26/2014 8:12:20 AM PDT by Principled (Obama: Unblemished by success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950

That’s a good question. I approach it from the opposite angle though: where in the Constitution does it forbid states from seceding? Because remember, at least the way it was originally written, the Constitution said “other than the powers enumerated herein, all rights are hereby reserved to the states, and the people” (paraphrased from memory)

So to me, that seems like there would need to be an amendment to the Constitution, at least at the time of the Civil War, that explicitly prohibited states from seceding from the Union, to make it “unconstitutional”. Otherwise that right is reserved for the states and the people.

Again I don’t know I’m no Constitutional scholar. Maybe we should ask Obama this question. < /sarc >


108 posted on 06/26/2014 8:12:20 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

You are right, the courses cannot enforce the limits on the presidential appointments, but neither can the President enforce regulatory power of the illegitimate appointee.


109 posted on 06/26/2014 8:12:42 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950

I’m not a supporter of these particular Freepers, but I’ll warn you ... they’ll call you an idiot for not going along with them ... :-) ...


110 posted on 06/26/2014 8:13:44 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 86 | View Replies]

To: Red_Devil 232

The Hobby Lobby decision will come Monday.

*********************************

Thanks.


111 posted on 06/26/2014 8:14:26 AM PDT by Qiviut ( One of the most delightful things about a garden is the anticipation it provides. (W.E. Johns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

The actions against a self-declared “nation” which declared that the Constitution did not apply to them are not by definition unconstitutional. The court of that time took no further actions nor did the congress or anyone else take any active actions to force Lincoln to withdraw anything.

He did not allow the confederacy and their SC sympathizers to have it both ways; to ignore the Constitution yet demand it be applied to them.


112 posted on 06/26/2014 8:14:32 AM PDT by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

I’ve been called names by idiots like secessionists in the past; doesn’t bother me. Not enough to convince me to follow them down the rabbit hole to hell and failure.


113 posted on 06/26/2014 8:16:35 AM PDT by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Principled

If the GOP takes over the Senate, my fear is that they will rescind the nuclear option.


114 posted on 06/26/2014 8:17:15 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

The US Supreme Court decision that Lincoln ignored didn’t say secession was Unconstitutional. I don’t believe I said that.


115 posted on 06/26/2014 8:19:14 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 83 | View Replies]

To: Principled
Any change will carry over to republican control eventually.

McConnell has already stated he could change the Senate rules back, if he becomes Majority Leader.

==

That is as dumb as Boehner announcing he will not shut down the government -- translation: he gave up the power of the purse.

==


116 posted on 06/26/2014 8:20:53 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950

I guess my point would be that the Presidents do whatever they can “get away with” - to the extent of whether someone can actually stop them or not.


117 posted on 06/26/2014 8:23:23 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 112 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950
Where in the Constitution is there any explict right given to the states to secede?

You have it upside down. The Constitution only authorizes the federal government to do certain things. Everything else is a power of the States, or the right of the people.

Governments have powers. People have rights.

/johnny

118 posted on 06/26/2014 8:24:44 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
We have been done in by the cowardice of the GOPe once again.

I used to think it was cowardice but am now inclined to think of it as complicity.

119 posted on 06/26/2014 8:27:38 AM PDT by NCjim (Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: kabar
If the GOP takes over the Senate, my fear is that they will rescind the nuclear option.

Yeah that would embolden TEA Party and discourage GOPE. The "see, I told you so" thing.

120 posted on 06/26/2014 8:30:51 AM PDT by Principled (Obama: Unblemished by success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“A Senate recess that is so short that it does not require the consent of the House under that Clause is not long enough to trigger the President’s recess-appointment power. Moreover, the Court has not found a single example of a recess appointment made during an intra-session recess that was shorter than 10 days. There are a few examples of inter-session recess appointments made during recesses of less than 10 days, but these are anomalies. In light of historical practice, a recess of more than 3 days but less than 10 days is presumptively too short to fall within the Clause...

...The broader interpretation ensures that offices needing to be filled can be filled. It does raise a danger that the President may attempt to use the recess-appointment power to circumvent the Senate’s advice and consent role. But the narrower interpretation risks undermining constitutionally conferred powers more seriously and more often. It would prevent a President from making any recess appointment to fill a vacancy that arose before a recess, no matter who the official, how dire the need, how uncontroversial the appointment, and how late in the session the office fell vacant.

Historical practice also strongly favors the broader interpretation. The tradition of applying the Clause to pre-recess vacancies dates at least to President Madison...”

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-1281_bodg.pdf

Overall, I think this is a reasonable opinion.


121 posted on 06/26/2014 8:32:47 AM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
McConnell has already stated he could change the Senate rules back, if he becomes Majority Leader.

That would be horrible. But it would play directly into the hands of TEA Party candidates. It would be like a vote for 0bamacare. If he were to change back, it should be only after we'd put in as many nominees under it as they had - or something similar.

But to just change it back would so play into the next elections - in 2 years.

122 posted on 06/26/2014 8:33:07 AM PDT by Principled (Obama: Unblemished by success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: kabar

So, what does this mean for the appointees?
Are they now unemployed?
Will they have to go thru re-screening process in the Senate?
What about any rules or regulations they have signed?
Are they now illegal?..................


123 posted on 06/26/2014 8:36:33 AM PDT by Red Badger (I've posted a total of 2,743 threads and 84,837 replies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
Any logic that begins with finding the actual wording and grammatical construct of the Constitution not broad enough is a logic that approves of judicial amending of the constitution.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Their broad reading says the president doesn't really have to get the advice and consent of the Senate.

124 posted on 06/26/2014 8:38:44 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: kabar
If the GOP takes over the Senate, my fear is that they will rescind the nuclear option.

Already promised. Mitch McConnell: GOP majority won't change filibuster rules
That is a misleading headline - read the article.

Enjoy - they don't call this the stupid party for nothing.
125 posted on 06/26/2014 8:41:59 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
My initial impression is that they will have to be renominated. Reid can expedite the process and with just 51 votes have the same people on the board.

The only real sticking point is the decisions that they have been made by the board with illegal members. No doubt, they will have to reissue those decisions to avoid legal suits. There may still be lawsuits if people have suffered damages due to the prior board decisions.

126 posted on 06/26/2014 8:43:29 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Boy do you ever have that one correct. The FEDS are nothing unless the rights were granted to them by the Constitution and passed by the STATES.


127 posted on 06/26/2014 8:43:35 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: kabar

So, really, it’s just a matter of paper shuffling.........................


128 posted on 06/26/2014 8:44:24 AM PDT by Red Badger (I've posted a total of 2,743 threads and 84,837 replies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

No doubt Reid anticipated the decision hence the nuclear option. The Reps weak response may trigger a nuclear option for all legislation in addition to confirmations. And Reid may expand the confirmations to include those to SCOTUS.


129 posted on 06/26/2014 8:50:33 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: kabar

In reading (major) past decisions, I’ve found that many were consistent with the overall public mood at the time. Today, the mood is that government power is overreaching. Roberts is said to monitor public mood because he is concerned about the court’s image. I don’t know if that is true, but it sure seemed that way in NFIB v. Sebelius.


130 posted on 06/26/2014 9:00:57 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: kabar

The Dems will scream bloody murder if and when the (R) ever use the nuclear option on them.....................


131 posted on 06/26/2014 9:03:46 AM PDT by Red Badger (I've posted a total of 2,743 threads and 84,837 replies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Nonetheless, the Court stopped short of compelling Madison (by writ of mandamus) to hand over Marbury’s commission, instead holding that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that enabled Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional, since it purported to extend the Court’s original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III established. The petition was therefore denied.


132 posted on 06/26/2014 9:05:07 AM PDT by veracious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

Unfortunately a constitution is only as good as the people who swear to uphold it, it is extremely rare for someone who takes that oath to live by it. They rarely are as openly defiant as President Jackson, they simply pretend to think, or in some cases maybe they actually do think that it means something entirely different from what it plainly says. In many cases those who are the most blatant in disregarding the original intent are those who serve on the courts, including all too often the supreme court. Then we have the problem of all too many voters who seem to believe that “shall not be infringed” actually means SHALL be infringed in any way that sounds good to me. Many voters also actually seem to believe in the fairy tale of the “right to privacy” which guarantees a woman “the right to choose” even though they are too squeamish to admit what she is choosing but the same people can’t find a right to any other kind of privacy even in the fourth amendment which is almost totally disregarded in many cases now.

In short “we the people” are not living up to the constitution. We have listened to those who sing the praises of “Democracy” when they should be condemning the evils of real democracy and praising a constitutional republic. The end result is that we now have a de facto democracy even though we may still have supposedly a de jure republic and we are learning anew that an actual democracy is a very BAD form of government.

I fully expect someone to come back and argue that republic and democracy are the same form of government and I am just “arguing semantics”, no problem, I know better and many others do as well. The link below is offered to those actually care about reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI


133 posted on 06/26/2014 9:13:46 AM PDT by RipSawyer (May the force be with you against the farce.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Hieronymus

Yes, it was Jackson, after the Cherokees had won in the SCOTUS re being ‘relocated.”

then came the “Trail of Tears”


134 posted on 06/26/2014 9:16:46 AM PDT by maine-iac7 (Christian is as Christian does - by their fruits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950

Regardless of one’s opinion on secession, the U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact.


135 posted on 06/26/2014 9:16:49 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

This is the reason a Boehner lawsuit is not a bad idea. The court has had enough of obammy. He has offended them as well, and they would work with a lawsuit. Harry Reid will never let obammy be impeached and removed... but the court may find him guilty of crimes.


136 posted on 06/26/2014 9:18:16 AM PDT by kjam22 (my music video "If My People" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74b20RjILy4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | 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.’

You are probably right but in essence if Obozo tries this then he will be declaring that his entire administration is operating outside the law. If the MSM applauds it, they will be saying that they are driven by their ideology and not their duty.

Their masks will drop away and all who can see will. I hope they are stupid enough in their arrogance to do this.


137 posted on 06/26/2014 9:18:42 AM PDT by Foundahardheadedwoman (God don't have a statute of limitations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
President Abraham Lincoln and the Supreme Court (see Ex parte Merryman)
138 posted on 06/26/2014 9:18:45 AM PDT by RedMDer (May we always be happy and may our enemies always know it. - Sarah Palin, 10-18-2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

“In a ruling that will constrain future presidents,”

Listen to the propaganda. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t this the first president who has ever done this.


139 posted on 06/26/2014 9:18:49 AM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler

The first quote was Jackson.

To paraphrase Lincoln “There’s a war on, STFU.”


140 posted on 06/26/2014 9:19:19 AM PDT by morphing libertarian ( On to impeachment and removal (IRS, Taliban, Fast and furious, VA, Benghazi)!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

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]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-176 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