Posted on 06/26/2014 9:25:49 AM PDT by Marie
Two and one-half years ago in 2012, Obama tried to slip-in appointments to the National Labor Relations Board without the constitutionally required Senate approval, claiming he had the right to do so because the Senate was in recess. There’s only one problem.
The Senate was not in formal recess when Obama made the dictatorial appointments.
Now the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in a unanimous 9-0 decision that Obama doesn’t get to define when the U.S. Senate is in recess, the Senate does.
This is the first time in U.S. history that the Constitution’s recess appointment clause has been challenged, as no former president has attempted to usurp powers as wannabe dictator, Barack Obama.
The respondent in the case was Noel Canning, a Pepsi-Cola distributor, who claimed that the NLRB lacked a quorum because three of the five Board members had been invalidly appointed by Obama. Canning was being forced by the NLRB into entering a collective bargaining agreement with a labor union.
Well, there was no law to break. )Prosecutor here). That is a term of art for committing a crime. In fact, every single POTUS who did it before was just as “guilty”.
Good ruling by POTUS as each Branch should be able to decide what it “does”. The future problem here is that SCOTUS will likely take the same position on Executive Orders.
But, good decision though meaningless since filibusters don’t apply to appointments. This was an archaic Constitutional Rule from when Congress only met a few months out of the year.
More ammo for Boehner’s lawsuit
No. And again, “illegal” means crime. This was not a crime or every POTUS still alive could be prosecuted.
In fact, since there is no filibuster, he could simply re-appoint them. All this does is permit each Party to gum up the works in the future if they want to by holding pro-forma sessions. But, as I said above, with no filibuster this ruling is meaningless.
I think they are watching the news like everyone else and fear they may be losing the consent of the governed. This IRS scandal is a huge problem for the commies as they could always count on support from politically dumbed down youth. However, even young skulls full of mush know emails don't disappear from hard drive crashes. Even the liberal deceived youth now KNOW they are being lied to.
Nope. Becasue after winning this in court at the lower levels the GOPe caved in and agreed to approve all of these appointments. They are now sitting in their chairs pushing the socialist union agenda and will for the foreseeable future. The only issue is whether the NLRB's acts before congress went ahead a approved them are valid.
Oooooh! So, who would actually do anything about it?
And now surely the White House will comply with the law. Mr Holder will ensure it.
And just exactly what does this little piece of paper mean? Oh I know what folks want it to mean but I look at the facts as they are. The court issues a ruling....are those people gone from the NLRB? NO! In fact they still sit there making decisions. And what of the decisions that have already been made? Are they still in effect? YES! And until they are successfully challenged in court they remain in effect. And by the time the case gets to SCOTUS who knows how it will be decided. So tell me now exactly what is the good news? What has changed?
NOTHING!
Obviously, the Justices need to take a refresher course in Constitutional law taught by the great constitutional scholar, Barak Obama. (/sarcasm) Wasn’t that the line of hooey that we were being feed back in 2008? I think that some graduates of the University of Chicago Law School should be given tuition refunds.
9 people to audit by the IRS.
*APPLAUSE*
Takes his pen away, ONCE AND FOR ALL!
9-0! AMAZING!
It will still just be all theater, but bloody.
All 0bama has to do is write an executive order disbanding the SCOTUS ...
The majority opinion was actually kinda bad.
5 AJs + CJ ruled that “longstanding arrangements between the political branches” and/or “the ballot box” were valid ways to determine constitutionality.
Scalia, in his concurrence, called this “the adverse possession theory of constitutionality”.
The literal text of the constitution could only carry 3 votes.
does that mean that those appointments are null and void, and the decisions made by those people are vacated?
Harry Reid and his gang will cover for him nothing is going to happen!
Since his recess appointment were unlawful, I hope this means that anyone holding office who was appointed in this manner, is now automatically unemployed.
Are you trying to tell us that a guy who couldn’t advance his success in the law anymore than becoming a lecturer in
Constitutional law, violated it?
WOW! An honest decision by all 9 judges!
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.