Supreme Court limits president's recess appointment power

[airdvr 197]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/26/supreme-court-limits-president-recess-appointment-power/

Quote

"The president made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even bothering to wait for its advice and consent," he said in a statement. "A unanimous Supreme Court has rejected this brazen power-grab."

BooYah!

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[quade 3]

Just to be clear, that opinion/quote was from Mitch McConnell; NOT the US Supreme Court.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

"At the same time, the court upheld the general authority of the president to make recess appointments. "

so as long as the opposition party is willing to not actually go into recess during the holidays, they can prevent the President from making these appointments. But after 10 days, the power is there.

[Boomerdog 0]

You missed a point or did not include it here. An important factor in the Court's decision also heavily considered thet the Senate NOT the President decides when the Senate is in session/not in session. It goes to the heart of Separation of Powers.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Boomerdog

You missed a point or did not include it here. An important factor in the Court's decision also heavily considered thet the Senate NOT the President decides when the Senate is in session/not in session. It goes to the heart of Separation of Powers.

I sure wish I had the Senate's powers to decide when I'm at work. I could show up once every three days, punch in and punch out 30 seconds later, and still get paid. Yippee! Of course, my employer might not be too happy.

I think there should be a time limit within which the senate has to vote on nominees, or else they are automatically confirmed. IOW, if the senate does not explicitly reject a nominee within the allowed time, they are confirmed.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[Boomerdog 0]

Well, the Senate has that power. As for the rest, we just disagree.

[kelpdiver 2]

Boomerdog

You missed a point or did not include it here. An important factor in the Court's decision also heavily considered thet the Senate NOT the President decides when the Senate is in session/not in session. It goes to the heart of Separation of Powers.

I find that to be a substantially less interesting aspect than the President's ability to appoint nominees without consent. (or the Senate's ability to sit on its ass forever).

[Boomerdog 0]

If the Senate wants to sit on its ass and do nothing fine with me. Everytime those bastards do get motivated and do something, they create a bigger mess.

[kelpdiver 2]

Boomerdog

If the Senate wants to sit on its ass and do nothing fine with me. Everytime those bastards do get motivated and do something, they create a bigger mess.

approving (or rejecting) a Presidential nominee isn't going to create a mess. It should be a basic requirement to get their paycheck.

Not having enough judges to run our legal systems, otoh, really does fuck things up.

[jgoose71 0]

quade

Just to be clear, that opinion/quote was from Mitch McConnell; NOT the US Supreme Court.

While you are correct that it was Mitch McConnell's quote, the supreme courts vote was unanimous. Since this hardly ever happens (everything seems to be 5-4 vote), one could say that the vote alone speaks volumes.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[Boomerdog 0]

Your entitled to your opinion.

[rehmwa 2]

The Supreme Court can't create any new limits.

It merely points out when the existing limits are exceeded under existing law. Makes sure that the limits under law are clarified.

In other words - the Supreme Court can't change the law, but it certainly can make it very clear when the existing law is being abused beyond the intent

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Southern_Man 0]

jgoose71

***Just to be clear, that opinion/quote was from Mitch McConnell; NOT the US Supreme Court.

While you are correct that it was Mitch McConnell's quote, the supreme courts vote was unanimous. Since this hardly ever happens (everything seems to be 5-4 vote), one could say that the vote alone speaks volumes.

No, there are frequently unanimous supreme court decisions. About 40% in fact.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"