Obama Appointments Ruled Unconstitutional

[diehardgator1]

Well finally some of the courts are starting to get things right. obama appointment's to the Labor relations board has been ruled unconstitutional

"A federal appeals court has ruled that President Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit says Obama did not have the power to make recess appointments earlier this year to the National Labor Relations Board."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2J0KGdGHb

[rivergator]

Obama made the recess appointments because the Republicans blocked all appointments for two years and made the NLRB completely worthless.

[diehardgator1]

Originally Posted by rivergator

Obama made the recess appointments because the Republicans blocked all appointments for two years and made the NLRB completely worthless.

By whose standards? obama still has to follow the law even though he thinks he can do as he pleases and to hell with the law. Maybe he needs to learn the meaning of the word compromise

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by diehardgator1

By whose standards? obama still has to follow the law even though he thinks he can do as he pleases and to hell with the law. Maybe he needs to learn the meaning of the word compromise

So you think he's the only president to make NLRB recess appts?

[fredsanford]

Originally Posted by diehardgator1

By whose standards? obama still has to follow the law even though he thinks he can do as he pleases and to hell with the law. Maybe he needs to learn the meaning of the word compromise

Compromise is unreachable with those committed to defeating you as their #1 goal.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by rivergator

Obama made the recess appointments because the Republicans blocked all appointments for two years and made the NLRB completely worthless.

This thing called the constitution apparently does not mean what you think it means.

[jimgata]

The law is the law, is the law, regardless of what Obama and his cultist members think.
The definition of compromise by Obama is to agree with him or you are biased, partisan or racist.
Obama is the most partisaned president ever and could not care less what the republicans think.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by MichaelJoeWilliamson

This thing called the constitution apparently does not mean what you think it means.

The Republicans pulled a little gambit. Left for the holidays but didn't officially recess.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by rivergator

The Republicans pulled a little gambit. Left for the holidays but didn't officially recess.

And this makes what Obama is doing constitutional...how?

[northgagator]

Originally Posted by fredsanford

Compromise is unreachable with those committed to defeating you as their #1 goal.

You are only seeing half of the problem

Both sides have the same #1 goal.

Thus the stalemate.

[egator1245]

Originally Posted by rivergator

Obama made the recess appointments because the Republicans blocked all appointments for two years and made the NLRB completely worthless.

If the Federal Courts say it's so, it's so. Please see abortion rights.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by MichaelJoeWilliamson

And this makes what Obama is doing constitutional...how?

because congress was technically not in recess.

[northgagator]

Originally Posted by rivergator

The Republicans pulled a little gambit. Left for the holidays but didn't officially recess.

Obama pulled a little gambit and was called on it by the court.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by northgagator

Obama pulled a little gambit and was called on it by the court.

you don't appear to understand the issue again.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by rivergator

because congress was technically not in recess.

Not according to the court;

"[T]he President made his three appointments to the Board on January 4, 2012, after Congress began a new session on January 3 and while that new session continued," the court wrote in its decision. "Considering the text, history, and structure of the Constitution, these appointments were invalid from their inception."

[LittleBlueLW]

I am glad to know we have so many constitutional scholars on this board.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

This might get interesting;

The Obama administration is expected to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, but if it stands, it means hundreds of decisions issued by the board over more than a year are invalid. It also would leave the five-member labor board with just one validly appointed member, effectively shutting it down. The board is allowed to issue decisions only when it has at least three sitting members.

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by MichaelJoeWilliamson

Not according to the court;

this explains it pretty well:

Angry Republicans argue that the Senate – which confirms or rejects most presidential nominations, but not recess appointments – was not technically in recess when Obama made his appointments on Wednesday, though it has conducted no real work since before Christmas.

They note that Congress did not approve an adjournment resolution before lawmakers left town. In addition, they say, both chambers have held brief sessions about every three days, though they've not tackled any actual legislative business.

The White House says its lawyers believe the Senate is in recess. They say the non-business, "pro forma" sessions that Congress has periodically staged are solely an attempt to block presidential appointments and do not change the fact that the Senate is in recess.

Democrats have used the same tactic that Republicans are using now.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by rivergator

this explains it pretty well:

Not according to the court.

[malligator]

I mean this as a truly bipartisan comment...Congress sucks. I wish I could do anything I wanted, anyway I wanted, any time I wanted and get paid big bucks for doing it. They--both sides--are ridiculous. We--as citizens--no matter our political agenda--should not have to argue over the childish antics of idiots. Seriously, they (all of them) whine over semantics like children whining because their sibling got a little bigger piece of cake.