AP
Breaking: Federal appeals court says Obama’s NLRB recess appointments are unconstitutional
Obama claims he acted properly because the Senate was away for the holidays. But the court says the Senate technically stayed in session when lawmakers gaveled in and out every few days for so-called “pro forma” sessions.
GOP lawmakers used the tactic specifically to prevent Obama from using his recess power to fill vacancies in an agency they claimed was too pro-union.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Emperor God-King Obama to Courts: “I won!”
Jeddite on January 25, 2013 at 10:55 AM
Which also makes Robert Cordray’s appointment to the CFPB unconstitutional too. And all the rules it has made are invalid.
rbj on January 25, 2013 at 10:56 AM
Does anyone think Obama will allow something a insignificant as a court ruling to affect him? Watch now as he attacks the legitimacy of the court, again.
MikeA on January 25, 2013 at 10:56 AM
Obama: “They’ve made their decision. Now let them enforce it.”
Mark1971 on January 25, 2013 at 10:57 AM
What difference does it make?
Flange on January 25, 2013 at 10:57 AM
What difference does it make?
Good Lt on January 25, 2013 at 10:57 AM
Since when does a Pharoh listen to the courts?
nobar on January 25, 2013 at 10:57 AM
LOL
Good Lt on January 25, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Some responses are so obvious they need to be made twice.
Flange on January 25, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Seriously, what does this do? Are they forced to resign? Are any actions they’ve taken retroactively abolished?
Doughboy on January 25, 2013 at 10:59 AM
Obama routinely ignores court rulings, so this won’t matter.
The Rogue Tomato on January 25, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Well well well, Obamaland got them a few troubles. Good.
tommy71 on January 25, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Will no-one rid me of these meddlesome courts?/Obama.
OldEnglish on January 25, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Bye Bye Cordray!
blammm on January 25, 2013 at 11:03 AM
I’m sure they’ll get it all straighten out in about four years.
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2013 at 11:03 AM
The president doesn’t have to worry. When this case gets appealed up to SCOTUS Roberts will just say these appointments are a tax.
Mark1971 on January 25, 2013 at 11:04 AM
I believe this case was filed by the legal team developed/including Mark Levin. Kuddos!
trs on January 25, 2013 at 11:07 AM
Yea, but what is the court going to do about it.
SWalker on January 25, 2013 at 11:08 AM
Does not matter to the Dems. Thats what the EO is and then ignore everything else.
My how I wish there were Republicans that did this. Watching the liberal heads explodes would just be the best of awesome.
watertown on January 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Exactly! Much of the CFPB’s rulemaking authority statutorily requires a Director.
blammm on January 25, 2013 at 11:12 AM
Meh im still going to do what i want to do
cmsinaz on January 25, 2013 at 11:12 AM
Lord O: “I find your faith in the constitution…disturbing.”
CorporatePiggy on January 25, 2013 at 11:12 AM
Clearly the federal court is racist.
Odysseus on January 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM
If the verdict stands…every decision made since the appointments will be nullified (I heard & hope).
trs on January 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM
Obama will have to deal with it. I suspect all rulings by the NLRB are void and the courts will not enforce them
AcidReflux on January 25, 2013 at 11:13 AM
What background experience do appellate judges have with presidential nominees?: Terry Moran
mwbri on January 25, 2013 at 11:14 AM
I don’t know why they are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court. If they lose there, they lose for both the NLRB and the CFPB. They can cut their losses by taking their ball and going home.
blammm on January 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Activist Judges!
Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 11:19 AM
Heh.
Vince on January 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Forward!
Anti-Control on January 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM
this is a very nice, and much needed, win
thurman on January 25, 2013 at 11:26 AM
Because, it’s really a tax. Tra-la-la.
/Dread Coward Roberts
chimney sweep on January 25, 2013 at 11:26 AM
Pfffff ………..
Obama want
he gets
Sir Napsalot on January 25, 2013 at 11:27 AM
Expect the pro forma sessions to be demonized, even though they were lauded when used to obstruct Bush.
Washington Nearsider on January 25, 2013 at 11:28 AM
Yep. Heard it on the news. All their rulings are also null and void.
Hey.. GOP.. take a look. Obama isn’t invincible. Maybe you could show the courage the courts do on occasion. And the courage Rand Paul is.
JellyToast on January 25, 2013 at 11:29 AM
Huh ? I thought it was Harry Reid’s Senate.
It is not the minority’s decision to make.
Jabberwock on January 25, 2013 at 11:30 AM
Anyone found the names of the 3 Judges, and who appointed them? So far none of the stories say, all they mention is that it was a unanimous decision.
OT: Speaking of court rulings today:
Del Dolemonte on January 25, 2013 at 11:30 AM
Look at this from another angle: there will be close to four years of this with states exerting sovereignty and on and on because of the WH’s political thug ways. It will be ugly but it is the only way to stop it.
mwbri on January 25, 2013 at 11:34 AM
0dumba will lose his executive privilege claim over Fast and Furious, too – to his chagrin, the courts are not in his back pocket, as he found during Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Sackett v. EPA, other unanimous decisions against him as well.
Anti-Control on January 25, 2013 at 11:38 AM
He also “recess appointed” Richard Corday to be the Director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
What is very important to know is, if the court follows the precedent set by the Supreme Court in New Process Steel v. NLRB, 130 S. Ct. 2635 (2010), then ALL of the rules, regulations, and decisions of the NLRB since the unconstitutional appointments WILL BE RENDERED NULL AND VOID.
The same would be true of those made by Corday at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 11:38 AM
But but Valarie Plame
Cindy Munford on January 25, 2013 at 11:45 AM
When one of these rare Obama defeats or setbacks occurs, I’m struck by how long it takes for the MSM to report it. The AP more or less broke it, and it’s hit Fox and USA Today, but I don’t see it yet on WaPo or any of the three major broadcast network sites, for example.
I always suspect these guys are quietly getting their acts together to decide what the party line will be – how do we spin this bad news? Are the judges all Republican nominees? What other evil judgments have they made? etc.
Drained Brain on January 25, 2013 at 11:45 AM
Score one for the home team… at last.
This is some bad sh*t we’re up against. The flies know.
petefrt on January 25, 2013 at 11:52 AM
That’s Racist!
Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 11:53 AM
Hey, GOP, how about filing more Constitutional challenges like this one. More like this. Unleash the lawyers on this little thug.
petefrt on January 25, 2013 at 12:11 PM
Yes, the case was brought by Mark Levin’s Landmark Legal Foundation. Mark is a true patriot.
TarheelBen on January 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Ooooh! Pick me! Pick me! I’ll go do it! I’ll go!
GWB on January 25, 2013 at 12:43 PM
As for the arguments being made by the Left that Obama HAD to act unconstitutionally – “We can’t wait!!!” – because of Senate Republicans’ “unreasonable use of the filibuster,” it should be noted that Obama nominated the 3 appointments to the NLRB on 14 December 2011 and then made the “non-recess-recess” appointments on 4 January 2012…before the nominees had completed the document submissions and Harry Reid even had a chance to schedule hearings or a vote on the nominations.
That’s a mere THREE WEEKS!!!
Resist We Much on January 25, 2013 at 1:06 PM
House Speaker John Boehner says he welcomes ruling that Obama’s ‘recess’ appointments to National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional – statement via @NBCNews
1 min ago by editor
canopfor on January 25, 2013 at 2:00 PM