Author Topic: Liberals Are Begging Obama To Ram Garland Through This One-Minute Window On Tuesday  (Read 650 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Liberals Are Begging Obama To Ram Garland Through This One-Minute Window On Tuesday
Photo of Kevin Daley
Kevin Daley
Legal Affairs Reporter
9:59 PM 01/02/2017
588
61
 
Judge Merrick Garland speaks at the podium as U.S. President Barack Obama applauds after Obama announced him as his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington D.C., March 16, 2016. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File photo   Judge Merrick Garland speaks at the podium as U.S. President Barack Obama applauds after Obama announced him as his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington D.C., March 16, 2016. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File photo ∧

The prospect of multiple Supreme Court appointments looms large over the incoming Trump administration, and liberal stalwarts are urging President Barack Obama to appoint Judge Merrick Garland to the high court by an aggressive, and dubious, parliamentary maneuver.

The Constitution’s recess appointment power allows the president to make appointments to federal offices without congressional consent while Congress is in recess. The appointment is only temporary, and expires at the conclusion of the ensuing Senate session — in this case, December 2017.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/02/liberals-are-begging-obama-to-ram-garland-through-this-one-minute-window-on-tuesday/#ixzz4UhaYZvsC

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
 As I said in a different thread, this is a load of bull.  Even if Obama tries this (and he's tried it before and been slapped down), the recess appointment only applies until the end of the next Congressional session.  All Congress has to do is to go into session, declare the session over, adjourn, and then go into a new session. Voila, recess appointment voided.

From the WaPo: "The real problem with trying to make such an intersession recess appointment is that the Supreme Court has held that such an appointment would be unconstitutional in Noel Canning v. NLRB. Dayen and Kilgore purport to address Noel Canning — claiming it does not apply since the case concerned only intrasession recess appointments — but they ignore what Justice Breyer’s opinion for the court actually says. As Seth Barrett Tillman points out, Noel Canning clearly precludes such an appointment. From Justice Breyer’s opinion:

    'we conclude that the phrase “the recess” applies to both intra-session and inter-session recesses. If a Senate recess is so short [i.e., less than 3 days] that it does not require the consent of the House, it is too short to trigger the Recess Appointments Clause. See Art. I, § 5, cl. 4. And a recess lasting less than 10 days is presumptively too short as well.'

"If a three-day recess is too short, a three-second recess would certainly be as well and, contrary to Dayen’s and Kilgore’s suggestion, Justice Breyer’s opinion makes no distinction between intrasession and intersession recesses. All told, every justice on the court embraced an opinion rejecting the idea that such an intersession recess appointment would be constitutional."
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,003
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Oh hell, I hope he does it.  That would force Garland to give up his seat on the D.C. Court of Appeals, and let Trump appoint his replacement.  Then, when Garland's appointment to the Court is struck down or his successor appointed, they don't have that seat either.

Offline IsailedawayfromFR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,752
Oh hell, I hope he does it.  That would force Garland to give up his seat on the D.C. Court of Appeals, and let Trump appoint his replacement.  Then, when Garland's appointment to the Court is struck down or his successor appointed, they don't have that seat either.

I like your thinking.
If there was ever an Intent of the Founder's document to be considered, making recess appointments in this manner would never pass muster.

Roberts could simply refuse to seat Garland as well.  Who could stop Roberts from doing that?
No punishment, in my opinion, is too great, for the man who can build his greatness upon his country's ruin~  George Washington