Courts finally telling Obama he is out of line

[danceswithdogs]

It's taking awhile, but Obama is finally being told he is overstepping is authority and is trampling the Constitution. Now if only they could negate his Presidency......

Appeals court strikes down Obama recess appointments

www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/01/25/obama-senate-recess-appointments-supreme-court/1864377/

A federal appeals court said Friday that President Obama overstepped his authority with a series of recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.

The case may wind up in the Supreme Court and determine how far the president can go in appointing people whose nominations would otherwise be blocked by the Senate.
The result could affect the standing of other Obama recess appointees, such as the head of the president's new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Richard Cordray.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said the administration "respectfully but strongly" disagrees with the court's ruling, arguing that it ran counter to precedents dating back 150 years.

The Justice Department also criticized the court's decision. "We disagree with the court's ruling and believe that the President's recess appointments are constitutionally sound," a department spokesperson said. (of course you disagree, what a surprise)

Administration officials indicated they would appeal the decision, and predicted they would win similar cases pending before other judges.

"This is one case in one court," said Carney. (yeah, but it's a damn good start, Jay!)

In legal briefs, Obama said his recess appointments were legal because the Senate was on vacation at the time. The president has authority to make temporary appointments without Senate approval if the Senate is not in session.

But Republican senators who joined in a lawsuit said the chamber stayed in a "pro forma" session during the time in question, denying Obama the right to make recess appointments — and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed with them. In these "pro forma" sessions, a senator would gavel an empty chamber to order every few days and then recess again.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said today's decision "will go a long way toward restoring the constitutional separation of powers," while Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the decision "reaffirmed that the Constitution is not an inconvenience but the law of the land." ;D

Senate Republicans had blocked Obama's appointees to the National Labor Relations Board, calling them too pro-union.

It's not known whether the Supreme Court will step into this White House-Congress dispute.

As it stands now, the decision invalidates hundreds of decisions made over the past year by the National Labor Relations Board. ;D ;D

Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation, released a statement calling the court's decision "a victory for independent-minded workers."


On Jan. 4, 2012 — the same day he appointed Cordray — Obama appointed Deputy Labor Secretary Sharon Block, union lawyer Richard Griffin and NLRB counsel Terence Flynn to fill vacancies on labor relations board — those are the appointments in question.

The Cordray appointment is still under challenge in a separate case pending before the appeals court.

C. Boyden Gray, a former White House counsel to President George H. W. Bush, said in a statement that one key takeaway from today's decision is that the president "has no power to declare when a recess exists" as he said Obama did with the appointment of Cordray and the NLRB board members.

[danceswithdogs]

Yes, President Obama, the Constitution applies to you, too

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Sometimes, Barack Obama acts like the Constitution does not apply to him and the Congress is an imaginary being. Friday, the United States Court of Appeals brought the president back to Earth and reminded him that that the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and the U.S. Senate are very much part of reality by voiding three of Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.

The D.C. Circuit ruled that the president could not end-run the confirmation process merely because at the beginning of 2012 the U.S. Senate was meeting every three business days in, what lawyers call, pro forma session. Oh, and during that pro forma session the Senate was also busy passing the payroll tax extension. Some pro forma session.

In its decision, the Court made clear that our president answers to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution which, in the words of the Court, “provides that the president ‘shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law.’”

Barack Obama figured that he could roll the Senate and roll the dice in one fell-swoop. He bet that he could hang his hat on the Constitution’s Recess Appointments Clause -- and get away with it.

Now, the language of the Constitution is pretty straight forward. If you are the President and you want to appoint someone to a position of serious responsibility that nominee must be vetted and approved by the Senate. Yes, the Senate can be cantankerous, unruly and even stupid. But, these are not constitutionally recognized rationales for the president to thumb his nose at the Appointments Clause.

George Washington respected the Appointments Clause. Abraham Lincoln respected that rule. John F. Kennedy respected the Appointments Clause. Ronald Reagan respected the Appointments Clause. Barack Obama, former president of the Harvard Law Review and constitutional law lecturer at the University of Chicago? Not so much.

The president thought that he had a better idea, and decided to take his cue from that paragon of virtue Warren G. Harding and the first president to be impeached, Andrew Johnson. Mr. Obama appointed someone (make that three someones) to posts that otherwise required confirmation, despite the fact that the Senate was still in session.

Barack Obama figured that he could roll the Senate and roll the dice in one fell-swoop. He bet that he could hang his hat on the Constitution’s Recess Appointments Clause -- and get away with it.

The Recess Appointments Clause permits the president to make a temporary appointment when Congress is really out of session to vacancy that really first arises when Congress is really out of session -- as when it has adjourned sine die, lawyer-speak and Latin for “without date”. Under the Recess Appointments Clause, the president “shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.” Id. art. II, § 2, cl. 3.

Here’s the thing. When the president filled the NLRB with three supposed recess appointments the Senate was still doing its thing. It was very much “in session.” In other words, the Senate was busy, but the White House hell-bent on imposing its appointees on the American public, advice and consent be damned.To top it all off, none of the vacancies arose which the president sought to fill first arose while the Senate was in recess. In other words, President Obama played a waiting game in the hope that his nominees could skirt the Constitution and the Congress.

A reminder. Mr. President, although you were reelected you remain bound by the Constitution. Indeed, just this week you swore on two Bibles to uphold it. Now it is time for you to remember your Oath.
Read more: www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/25/yes-president-obama-constitution-applies-to-too/?intcmp=trending#ixzz2J1xAllsu

[Joe Cocker]

What good was the JUDGE ruling? They aren't FIRED still screwing this country as of today ignoring the order and 0 is laughing at the court system.