Appeals Senate Passes Sandy Bill | Court Rebukes NLRB "Recess" Appointments . . .
. . . "A Particularly Timely Warning" To Obama On Executive Power Overreach!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Jan. 29, 2012:
The House was not in session today. They return tomorrow. The House recently passed a measure that would suspend the debt ceiling until May 19th. The legislation allows the president to continue to borrow money to fund the government operations.
The U.S. has already reached the debt ceiling, but is currently undertaking “extraordinary measures” to continue to meet its financial obligations. While there are many who will argue whether or not we should raise the debt ceiling, delaying this debate gives Washington an opportunity to have a frank discussion about our budget and what our priorities should be over the next year.
The Senate reconvened and at 4:30 PM, they took H.R. 152, Hurricane Sandy disaster relief package. Following an hour of debate, the Senate voted on an amendment from Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) providing for offsets for the bill, and then on final passage. The bill passed 62-36. The long-delay by democrats is finally over and the hurricane Sandy relief package is being sent to the President Obama who has said he will sign it. As noted in prior articles, the House passed this bill two weeks ago after stripping out much of the spending unrelated to disasters. And the Senate Democrat leader sat on the bill.
Tomorrow, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he plans to consider the nomination of despicable Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) to be Secretary of State.
Reviewing Friday’s court decision striking down President Obama’s “recess” appointments, The Wall Street Journal editorializes, “President Obama has shown increasing contempt for the constitutional limits on his power, and the courts are finally awakening to the news. A unanimous panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday that the President's non-recess recess appointments are illegal and an abuse of executive power. . . . In the 46-page opinion, the three-judge panel said that ‘not only logic and language, but also constitutional history’ reject the President's afflatus. . . . ‘An interpretation of “the Recess” that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement,’ wrote Chief Judge David Sentelle for the court, ‘giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law.’ Judge Sentelle added, in a clear warning to the lawyers who let Mr. Obama walk out on this limb, that ‘Allowing the President to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution's separation of powers.’”
The WSJ editors also note, “[T]he ruling potentially invalidates dozens of NLRB decisions since the illegal recess appointments were made. A similar mess occurred in 2010 when the Supreme Court ruled in New Process Steel v. NLRB that some 600 decisions made by the NLRB without a three-member quorum were invalid.”
Yet according to The Washington Post, the Obama administration and its NLRB appointees have apparently decided to act as if nothing has changed. “The impact of that decision by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Noel Canning v. NLRB will depend on what the Obama administration does next. First things first, the NLRB said Friday that it plans to move forward with business as usual, issuing decisions in labor disputes as though nothing has changed. NLRB spokeswoman Nancy Cleeland said more than 100 such cases are pending with the board. . . . If the administration appeals Friday’s decision to the Supreme Court, the ruling there would determine the validity of all board decisions since Obama made his appointments in January 2012 — and the validity of the board members themselves. The board has already ruled on more than 200 disputes since Obama made his appointments, according to Cleeland, who said at least a dozen of those cases have been appealed to circuit courts.”
Of course, as the WSJ editors write, “White House spokesman Jay Carney criticized the unanimous decision Friday, which is consistent with the President's sense of constitutional entitlement. . . . Mr. Obama has also signaled his intention to govern as much as possible by stretching the legal bounds of regulation and executive orders. The D.C. Circuit ruling is thus a particularly timely warning that while Mr. Obama was re-elected . . . he's subject to the rule of law like everybody else.”
Tags: Senate, Sandy bill, Court decision, illegal recess appointments, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Today in Washington, D.C. - Jan. 29, 2012:
The House was not in session today. They return tomorrow. The House recently passed a measure that would suspend the debt ceiling until May 19th. The legislation allows the president to continue to borrow money to fund the government operations.
The U.S. has already reached the debt ceiling, but is currently undertaking “extraordinary measures” to continue to meet its financial obligations. While there are many who will argue whether or not we should raise the debt ceiling, delaying this debate gives Washington an opportunity to have a frank discussion about our budget and what our priorities should be over the next year.
The Senate reconvened and at 4:30 PM, they took H.R. 152, Hurricane Sandy disaster relief package. Following an hour of debate, the Senate voted on an amendment from Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) providing for offsets for the bill, and then on final passage. The bill passed 62-36. The long-delay by democrats is finally over and the hurricane Sandy relief package is being sent to the President Obama who has said he will sign it. As noted in prior articles, the House passed this bill two weeks ago after stripping out much of the spending unrelated to disasters. And the Senate Democrat leader sat on the bill.
Tomorrow, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says he plans to consider the nomination of despicable Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) to be Secretary of State.
Reviewing Friday’s court decision striking down President Obama’s “recess” appointments, The Wall Street Journal editorializes, “President Obama has shown increasing contempt for the constitutional limits on his power, and the courts are finally awakening to the news. A unanimous panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday that the President's non-recess recess appointments are illegal and an abuse of executive power. . . . In the 46-page opinion, the three-judge panel said that ‘not only logic and language, but also constitutional history’ reject the President's afflatus. . . . ‘An interpretation of “the Recess” that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement,’ wrote Chief Judge David Sentelle for the court, ‘giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law.’ Judge Sentelle added, in a clear warning to the lawyers who let Mr. Obama walk out on this limb, that ‘Allowing the President to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution's separation of powers.’”
The WSJ editors also note, “[T]he ruling potentially invalidates dozens of NLRB decisions since the illegal recess appointments were made. A similar mess occurred in 2010 when the Supreme Court ruled in New Process Steel v. NLRB that some 600 decisions made by the NLRB without a three-member quorum were invalid.”
Yet according to The Washington Post, the Obama administration and its NLRB appointees have apparently decided to act as if nothing has changed. “The impact of that decision by a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Noel Canning v. NLRB will depend on what the Obama administration does next. First things first, the NLRB said Friday that it plans to move forward with business as usual, issuing decisions in labor disputes as though nothing has changed. NLRB spokeswoman Nancy Cleeland said more than 100 such cases are pending with the board. . . . If the administration appeals Friday’s decision to the Supreme Court, the ruling there would determine the validity of all board decisions since Obama made his appointments in January 2012 — and the validity of the board members themselves. The board has already ruled on more than 200 disputes since Obama made his appointments, according to Cleeland, who said at least a dozen of those cases have been appealed to circuit courts.”
Of course, as the WSJ editors write, “White House spokesman Jay Carney criticized the unanimous decision Friday, which is consistent with the President's sense of constitutional entitlement. . . . Mr. Obama has also signaled his intention to govern as much as possible by stretching the legal bounds of regulation and executive orders. The D.C. Circuit ruling is thus a particularly timely warning that while Mr. Obama was re-elected . . . he's subject to the rule of law like everybody else.”
Tags: Senate, Sandy bill, Court decision, illegal recess appointments, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 5:36 PM - Post Link
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home