Obama recess appointments unconstitutional

[ivwshane]

No, Republican's did their job and obligation. They said no to the appointments. That is the Senate's job and obligation, to confirm or deny these appointments. That is the role of the legislative branch, and republican patriots fulfilled it beautifully.

Lol ignorance is great when its used to help your argument, isnt it?!

They haven't even said no. If this was about Obama making recessed appointments because republicans voted against them you would have a point but they aren't doing that.

 

[Wreckem]

If memory serves it was Harry Reid who started to keep the Senate in a "pro forma" session to prevent recess appointments from the Bush administration. However I think Bush made far more recess appointments than any president in US history...like 6 times what Obama has done so far and now this trick is used by both chambers.

Regardless, the appointment process is broken and has been for decades.

Edit: apparently 2nd most after Reagan.

And this ruling makes almost ALL of Bush's "recess" appointments improper because almost none of them fit within the ruling. Its to bad we can't go back, invalidate and take away title and pension benefits for all those improperly appointed.

 

[thraashman]

The point of the ruling was that the executive branch doesn't get to decide if they were in recess or not. The senate has rules governing their legislative sessions. Like it or not, they were in session according to the rules of the senate. obummer took it upon himself as the dear leader to decide that no, they were not in session, and thus he could do whatever he wanted. Wrong on all counts, as usual.

This is a good ruling, hopefully the scotus makes the same (correct) call.

The legal justification that Obama used makes sense. Congress wasn't in session it was in pro forma session, which is a fancy way of saying "bullshit session". Obama's executive power says he can make recess appointments, there is some legal justification for saying that pro forma sessions are not real sessions. He got rebuffed on it and lost, maybe he'll appeal, maybe he'll win on appeal who knows. Do I like that he had to resort to this tactic, no. But I don't dislike it anymore than the massive amount of bullshit the GOP has been pulling (Issa releasing classified docs to Congressional records as a run around to illegally leaking classified docs, trying to drown the admin in bullshit hearings to grind the nation to a halt, using the filibuster more than all previous minority parties combined, lying on Congressional record about something and then claiming it was "not intended to be a factual statement").

In the end this is Obama trying to challenge the Constitutionality of pro forma sessions, not the Constitutionality of recess appointments.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Spidey: please don't read this post. It contains factual information and evidence from a reliable source that contradicts your opinion.

Judicial vacancies have heightened especially during the last three years. During the first two years, a slow stream of judicial nominations from the Obama White House and aggressive procedural obstruction in the Senate produced near-record numbers of judicial vacancies at the circuit and district court levels.
...
At the end of the third year of their first terms in 1995 and 2003, respectively, the Clinton and Bush administrations had reduced the number of judicial vacancies they had inherited from their predecessors. This contrasts with the Obama record, under whom vacancies on district courts have skyrocketed.
...
The number of district judge vacancies fell from 90 to 50 during the Clinton administration and from 54 to 35 during the Bush administration. But under the Obama administration, the number of district court vacancies during the same period rose from 41 to 65.
...
Why the slow pace in the nomination of district judge nominees by the Obama White House? Wheeler suggests that divisions between the administration and home-state senators, Republicans and Democrats alike, over candidates, as well as initial disorganization in the Obama administration's judicial nomination machinery, contributed to the delay. He also points out that, even though President Obama's nominees received Senate confirmation hearings more quickly than did those during George W. Bush's administration, the nominees have waited longer, overall, to be confirmed. Three of Clinton's 151 confirmations of district judges took longer than 180 days, whereas 51 of Obama's 97 confirmations took 180 days or longer.

http://www.fedbar.org/Advocacy/Washington-Watch/WW-Archives/2012/April-2012.aspx

Bolding at the end is mine.

 

[spidey07]

Spidey: please don't read this post. It contains factual information and evidence from a reliable source that contradicts your opinion.



http://www.fedbar.org/Advocacy/Washington-Watch/WW-Archives/2012/April-2012.aspx

Bolding at the end is mine.

Republicans ran on a platform of stopping Obama.

They are doing all they can to stop him. Very admirable what they are doing really.

 

[thraashman]

If memory serves it was Harry Reid who started to keep the Senate in a "pro forma" session to prevent recess appointments from the Bush administration. However I think Bush made far more recess appointments than any president in US history...like 6 times what Obama has done so far and now this trick is used by both chambers.

Regardless, the appointment process is broken and has been for decades.

Edit: apparently 2nd most after Reagan.

Yes to my knowledge Harry Reid did start the pro forma session thing. It's probably why he backed down on changing filibuster rules because he saw how much this pro forma crap bites him in the ass now. And Bush made 171 total recess appointments I believe and Obama is at like 32 right now which puts him on pace to do slightly more than a third as many as Bush.

 

[Wreckem]

Republicans ran on a platform of stopping Obama.

They are doing all they can to stop him. Very admirable what they are doing really.

Better not whine when turn about becomes fair play. Sadly you and the republicans will.

 

[thraashman]

Republicans ran on a platform of stopping Obama.

They are doing all they can to stop him. Very admirable what they are doing really.

And they just lost the Presidency and lost seats in both houses of Congress despite massive gerrymandering. In other words, We The People don't want them to do this bullshit anymore.

 

[spidey07]

Better not whine when turn about becomes fair play. Sadly you and the republicans will.

It seems to me the liberal and democrats are the ones doing the whining. "Why won't you just let Obama do everything he wants!"

 

[ivwshane]

It seems to me the liberal and democrats are the ones doing the whining. "Why won't you just let Obama do everything he wants!"

Party before country! We get it, you agree with it.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Very admirable what they are doing really.

Yes, I understand -- you're a partisan hack. If the Democrats were doing this stuff to a Republican president you'd be foaming at the mouth about having them all arrested or something. But since it's Republicans messing up Democrats, why, it's great!

Aside from your opinions, which I really couldn't care less about since they are incredibly predictable and of little consequence, you made a specific statement: that the Republicans in the senate are doing their jobs.

Based on their role as defined in the Constitution, they are not. Their role is to provide "advice and consent" on nominations. Not block everything in sight and then play stupid gavel games to also block recess appointments.

The bottom line is that for all the crowing about Obama doing "end runs" and what not, the senate was also playing games to block appointments on a technicality.

So, if you want to be happy that the Republicans are "doing all they can" to stop Obama, feel free. But as a simple matter of fact, they are not making a good faith effort to fulfill their obligations.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

It seems to me the liberal and democrats are the ones doing the whining. "Why won't you just let Obama do everything he wants!"

This, of course, is a mischaracterization. Nobody is asking for Obama to do everything he wants. They are asking for the senate Republicans to fulfill their constitutional obligations, instead of abusing their power for political reasons.

 

[Ausm]

Better not whine when turn about becomes fair play. Sadly you and the republicans will.

I am looking forward to it but it's not likely the GOP will get back in power anytime soon. I guess that's why they are attempting to rig the EC in the swing States.

 

[Wreckem]

It seems to me the liberal and democrats are the ones doing the whining. "Why won't you just let Obama do everything he wants!"

I seem to recall Republicans whining an awful lot when democrats moderatly delayed but ultimately confirmed alot of Bush's nominees(well the ones that he didn't illegally, atleast under todays ruling, push through).

You are a delusional partisan hack but that is nothing new.

 

[waggy]

I'd be willing to agree that what Obama did was outside the legal bounds of his power, if the Republicans would agree that they have employed unconscionable tactics that made this situation possible in the first place.

agreed. fucking politics is pissing me off. Far to many (in politics and on this forum) only care for there team.


"does this fuck over R/D? yes? WOOO!" no matter that it is good/needed for the country.

 

[spidey07]

This, of course, is a mischaracterization. Nobody is asking for Obama to do everything he wants. They are asking for the senate Republicans to fulfill their constitutional obligations, instead of abusing their power for political reasons.

All this could be avoided if the Senate democrats did their job and passed a budget (you know...their constitutional obligation). There's nothing political about what republican patriots are doing, they are doing everything thing they can for our nation and fulfilling their duty bound obligations.

It is democrats who aren't fulfilling their obligation, great fuck be upon them.

 

[Ausm]

All this could be avoided if the Senate democrats did their job and passed a budget (you know...their constitutional obligation). There's nothing political about what republican patriots are doing, they are doing everything thing they can for our nation and fulfilling their duty bound obligations.

Yeah that's why Herpes has a higher approval rate.....

 

[monovillage]

I was glad to see that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals slapped down the Obama imperial presidency and is going to call into question so many of the poor rulings the NLRB made in this past year.

“Allowing the president to define the scope of his own appointment power would eviscerate the Constitution’s separation of powers,” Chief Judge David Sentelle wrote in the 46-page ruling.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...fa14-6707-11e2-889b-f23c246aa446_story_1.html

 

[Ryan]

Wouldn't it be awesome if Obama suddenly nullified the jobs of everyone who was recess appointed by Bush?? Conservatives would shit their pants.......

 

[monovillage]

Wouldn't it be awesome if Obama suddenly nullified the jobs of everyone who was recess appointed by Bush?? Conservatives would shit their pants.......

You mean fire them? He can do it if he wants, with the exception of some judges I think.

 

[spidey07]

You mean fire them? He can do it if he wants, with the exception of some judges I think.

Don't think he could do judges. But if they are part of the executive branch then he sure could and I believe most presidents do when they take office as part of their administration and the new secretaries.

 

[hal2kilo]

Aint this a peach! Even though the ruling was inline with the Constitution i cant help but think it was politically motivated (judges were appointed by republicans). Wish these trials were about the law more than partisan politics.

Yep, judges are just politicians in robes these days.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

All this could be avoided if the Senate democrats did their job and passed a budget.

This has what to do with the GOP blocking judicial appointments exactly?

 

[spidey07]

This has what to do with the GOP blocking judicial appointments exactly?

Senate republicans have said many times over they won't block appointments if Democrats would pass a budget. This could all be avoided, but the Senate democrats haven't passed a budget since Obama got into office. Disgusting democrats.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Senate republicans have said many times over they won't block appointments if Democrats would pass a budget. This could all be avoided, but the Senate democrats haven't passed a budget since Obama got into office. Disgusting democrats.

Yes, it's always Republicans GOOD! and Democrats BAD! Just like in the cartoons. Makes life so easy.

You won't read this, and you wouldn't understand it even if you did, but others might be interested in the reasons why the whole "meanie Democrats won't pass a budget" thing is just another political game.