Let's see how many recs this gets.In a case freighted with major constitutional implications, a federal appeals court on Friday overturned President Obama’s controversial recess appointments from last year, ruling he abused his powers and acted when the Senate was not actually in a recess.The three-judge panel’s ruling is a major blow to Mr. Obama. The judges ruled that the appointments he made to the National Labor Relations Board are illegal, and the board no longer has a quorum to operate.But the ruling has even broader constitutional significance, with the judges arguing that the president’s recess appointment powers don’t apply to “intrasession” appointments — those made when Congress has left town for a few days or weeks.Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/25/federal-cour...
I rec'd it :)This ruling is bigger than people think. It means O can't bypass the Senate for one and for two it invalidates all the NLRB's rulings from last year. Since Cordray was also appointed that way, everything he did is also zeroed out.
Crickets from libruls.
it means the ussc needs to resolve the conflicting opinions between this appeals court and the 11th circuit 2003 decision evans v. stephens:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recess_appointment
Crickets from libruls. And more denigration, lack of respect for others, hysteria etc from the right. I thought it was bad the way the left denigrated Mr. Bush...but the right has been equal in return.And this is why there are 'checks and balances'. Mr. Obama made a big mistake and unless their appeal is granted, his administration in general, and Mr. Obama specifically, definitely looks bad here. I thought Mr. Obama specialized in constitutional matters.Icemann
Were you concerned about "abuse of power" when the 11th Circuit reached the opposite result in 2004 in upholding a GWB recess appointment?http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216424ord2.pdfThe federal courts of appeals are now split on this issue.But, keep acting like it's a brand-new issue, and of course keep misspelling the President's name because that really adds credibility to your posts.
Were you concerned about "abuse of power" when the 11th Circuit reached the opposite result in 2004 in upholding a GWB recess appointment?IIRC the Bush appointments were made when the Senate was actually in recess. Obama's weren't. Harry Reid held the Senate over and they never were actually in recess.
The government under Owebama is like a dysfunctional marriage. The country is now more divided than ever in its history.Thanks, Owebama. Hope and change indeed.
Today's news reports consistently emphasize that this decision is "a victory for Republicans." Gee: must be that rampant liberal media bias. A panel of judges all appointed by Republican presidents reached a decision that Republicans applaud. That's a bit like saying I'm really happy that only people I invited decided to show up for my birthday party.The same theorists who decry judicial activism have done just what the higher court (SCOTUS) did in the now-infamous "Citizen United" decision three years ago: disregard _stare decisis_ and years upon years of settled governmental practice. How is that a "conservative" outcome in any meaningful way?Oh, but congrats to the stonewallers in Congress. The unitary executive was a highly popular concept just a few years ago. What changed? "Their guy" lost the presidential election. Victory: the one truly enduring principle.
Supremes will sort it out, no doubt influenced by the long history of use by both parties and vagueness of the term "recess".Go back to worrying about the Beyonce' "scandal".
IIRC the Bush appointments were made when the Senate was actually in recess. Obama's weren't. Harry Reid held the Senate over and they never were actually in recess.You may be thinking of the more common type of recess appointment, not the particular type made by Bush that was challenged in 2004 and the NLRB appointments Obama made. The Bush appointment challenged in the 2004 11th Circuit decision was made during a long weekend in February, not during a recess between Congresses. The Obama NLRB recess appointments were also not made between Congresses.That's the key distinction here, and the 11th and DC Circuits are in conflict over the propriety of such appointments, according to Scotusblog:"Strictly curbing the President’s power to temporarily fill government posts to keep an agency in operation, the D.C. Circuit Court ruled Friday that the constitutional authority to fill a vacancy can only be used when one Congress has ended and before a new Congress comes to town, or when there is a formal break at the end of one session, but not during any other mid-session break.""[A] two-to-one majority [also] ruled that the vacancy-filling power only applies to vacancies that actually open up during a formal recess, between sessions or between Congresses. Because lower courts are split on both issues, this historic controversy over the constitutional separation of powers is likely to go on to the Supreme Court."http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/01/presidents-appointment-pow...
I thought Mr. Obama specialized in constitutional matters.Icemann Does not matter if he did. Obama is a tyrant wannabe. How long are the lefties and adoring media going going to give him a pass?Obama is not a fool. He knows he's got 4 years to just wait for one more conservative justice to croak or retire. Then he'll ruin the US for decades.MetalDecathlete
How long are the lefties and adoring media going going to give him a pass?President Bush's similar 2004 appointment was upheld in court. You righties have given him a pass ever since, for this, and for much, much worse. He gets a pass for 9/11, but Obama's gotta pay for Benghazi. Bush destroys the economy, Obama's gotta pay for not fixing it soon enough. Bush fuels a giant deficit with two unpaid-for wars and a bunch of tax cuts, but the resulting deficit is Obama's. Bush drags us into Iraq, Obama gets us out, but Obama's gotta pay for ... something.You folks are unreal.
Does not matter if he did. Obama is a tyrant wannabe. New name, but same ridiculous garbage.
and of course keep misspelling the President's name because that really adds credibility to your posts. There's no such thing as "credibility" in this zoo except librul-to-librul posts. Y'all follow your Pied Pipers and listen to no one else...ever.
Courts usually do not like exalting form over substance.Ken
and of course keep misspelling the President's name because that really adds credibility to your posts.There's no such thing as "credibility" in this zoo except librul-to-librul posts. Y'all follow your Pied Pipers and listen to no one else...ever. Kettle...meet Pot. ; )Icemann
"This ruling is bigger than people think. It means O can't bypass the Senate for one and for two it invalidates all the NLRB's rulings from last year."It may be even bigger than YOU think.After all, with nearly 300 such appointments being made between 1867 and 2004, you may be able to go back and invalidate thousands of rules and regulations made over the past century and a half.Of course, normally, the problem would be that such a ruling comes back to bite the next GOP president in the rear, since dems will be salivating to block appointments when their turn comes....however, considering the current state of the GOP, that is likely to be at least 12 years down the line, so I guess it's not something they need to worry about.
Obama is not a fool. He knows he's got 4 years to just wait for one more conservative justice to croak or retire. Then he'll ruin the US for decades. ===================================Nice thought, but not that likely. The oldest justices are Ginsburg (79), Kennedy (76), Scalia (76), and Breyer (74). And it's not like there's a solid 5-4 block now; Kennedy is often referred to as a swing vote, and Roberts refreshingly thinks for himself sometimes too. (remember Obamacare?)Bill
Not to mention the infantilizaton / baby talk used for the name of President of the U.S. in this thread's title clearly shows the emotional maturity of a fourth grader. flowerschild
MetalDecathlete says... Obama is a tyrant wannabe. How long are the lefties and adoring media going going to give him a pass?Until he crushes the life out of the last conservative with his jackboots, obviously.Obama is not a fool. He knows he's got 4 years to just wait for one more conservative justice to croak or retire. Then he'll ruin the US for decades.BOOGA BOOGA BOOGAAAAAAAAAA!!!
SnoozefoolYou folks are unreal. No you and the 59 Obama adoring fools that rec'd you (as of now) are what's unreal.Metal
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Rat