Supreme Court rebukes Obama on recess appointments
By Robert Barnes June 26 | Wa Post
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that President Obama exceeded his constitutional authority in making high-level government appointments in 2012 when he declared the Senate to be in recess and unable to act on the nominations.
Obama made appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) at a time when the Senate was holding pro forma sessions every three days precisely to thwart the president’s ability to exercise the power.
“The Senate is in session when it says it is,” Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote for the court, stressing that if the Senate is able to conduct business, that is enough to keep the president from making recess appointments.
But the court stepped back from handing Obama — and those who will follow him in the Oval Office — a more substantial loss. A bare majority of the justices upheld, in theory at least, the president’s ability to make recess appointments when the Senate is indeed on extended break, saying history weighs in favor of a broad power.
Obama wanted to have a legacy, and instead he is leaving a giant stain.
Obama actually showed he could unify SCOTUS in a unanimous decision that he over-stepped his power and authority. That’s something.
Although Breyer said the court hesitated to “upset the compromises and working arrangements that the elected branches of government themselves have reached,” it is the lack of such cooperation that brought the dispute to the court for the first time in the more than 200-year history of the Constitution.
Court “hesitates to upset”…. SCOTUS has a function. . What “working arrangement”? Neither word applies to POTUS. Lack of cooperation is a huge understatement. They heard the same State of Union speech we heard. It was they who handed him a victory in ObamaCare using verbal gymnastics. Now Breyer and SCOTUS take exception !?!
RightRing | Bullright
The SCOTUS has now done the same thing to Obama that Putin did they bitch slapped him.
🙂 I hope they get more aggressive in the future, SCOTUS that is.