SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Supreme Court Rules Against Obama On Recess Appointments
Court strikes down three appointments as unconstitutional
Jun 26, 2014
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down three of President Barack Obama's recess appointments, ruling that he violated the constitution by filling temporary vacancies when the Senate was still in session.
The unanimous 9-0 ruling backed Senate Republicans and will limit Obama's ability to make future appointments.
Although the decision was unanimous, the court was split 5-4 over the extent of the president's power to make recess appointments altogether. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the ruling risks allowing the selection privilege to become "a weapon to be wielded by future Presidents against future Senates," while Justice Stephen Breyer stated that going any further in limiting the president's power in filling vacancies could disrupt "centuries of history" of traditional practice.
Obama previously argued that the Senate intentionally tried to obstruct his attempts to make recess appointments, having three-day "brief sessions" during an extended break and creating a resolution that no business would be conducted during that time. The court rejected his argument, stating that the presidential power to make recess appointments only applies to breaks that take place after the end of a full Congressional session and before the start of a new one, rather than those that take place mid-year.
"We must give weight to the Senate's own determination of when it is and is not in session," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the court's decision. A recess of less than 10 days is "presumptively too short" to allow for presidential appointments.
The Senate confirmed all three of the selections, so the ruling will not have any immediate effect. However, it could be felt in the near future, as midterm elections may result in a Republican-majority Senate and NLRB appointments expire in 2018.
_____________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down three of President Barack Obama's recess appointments, ruling that he violated the constitution by filling temporary vacancies when the Senate was still in session.
The unanimous 9-0 ruling backed Senate Republicans and will limit Obama's ability to make future appointments.
Although the decision was unanimous, the court was split 5-4 over the extent of the president's power to make recess appointments altogether. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the ruling risks allowing the selection privilege to become "a weapon to be wielded by future Presidents against future Senates," while Justice Stephen Breyer stated that going any further in limiting the president's power in filling vacancies could disrupt "centuries of history" of traditional practice.
Obama previously argued that the Senate intentionally tried to obstruct his attempts to make recess appointments, having three-day "brief sessions" during an extended break and creating a resolution that no business would be conducted during that time. The court rejected his argument, stating that the presidential power to make recess appointments only applies to breaks that take place after the end of a full Congressional session and before the start of a new one, rather than those that take place mid-year.
"We must give weight to the Senate's own determination of when it is and is not in session," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the court's decision. A recess of less than 10 days is "presumptively too short" to allow for presidential appointments.
The Senate confirmed all three of the selections, so the ruling will not have any immediate effect. However, it could be felt in the near future, as midterm elections may result in a Republican-majority Senate and NLRB appointments expire in 2018.
_____________________
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down three of President Barack Obama's recess appointments, ruling that he violated the constitution by filling temporary vacancies when the Senate was still in session.
The unanimous 9-0 ruling backed Senate Republicans and will limit Obama's ability to make future appointments.
Although the decision was unanimous, the court was split 5-4 over the extent of the president's power to make recess appointments altogether. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the ruling risks allowing the selection privilege to become "a weapon to be wielded by future Presidents against future Senates," while Justice Stephen Breyer stated that going any further in limiting the president's power in filling vacancies could disrupt "centuries of history" of traditional practice.
Obama previously argued that the Senate intentionally tried to obstruct his attempts to make recess appointments, having three-day "brief sessions" during an extended break and creating a resolution that no business would be conducted during that time. The court rejected his argument, stating that the presidential power to make recess appointments only applies to breaks that take place after the end of a full Congressional session and before the start of a new one, rather than those that take place mid-year.
"We must give weight to the Senate's own determination of when it is and is not in session," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the court's decision. A recess of less than 10 days is "presumptively too short" to allow for presidential appointments.
The Senate confirmed all three of the selections, so the ruling will not have any immediate effect. However, it could be felt in the near future, as midterm elections may result in a Republican-majority Senate and NLRB appointments expire in 2018.
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy