• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim[W:88]

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Supreme Court justices took a dim view Monday of President Obama’s claim of almost unlimited powers to appoint top government officials, saying he appeared to be breaking with the founders’ vision of separation of powers between the branches of government when he tried an end-run around the Senate in 2012.

Both liberal and conservative justices seemed skeptical of the president’s claim, though they struggled with how far to go in deciding the limits of a president’s recess appointment power.

If they ruled narrowly, they could simply overturn Mr. Obama’s 2012 appointments by finding he tried to act when the Senate considered itself still in session. But the court could act more broadly and rule that the president’s recess powers only apply to a narrow set of positions that become vacant when the Senate has finished business for the year, and that the president can only fill those jobs during that same recess break.

Read more: Justices skeptical of Obama's recess appointment claim - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Ok, no lighthearted brevity with this one, just an oldie but goodie...Last year Obama tried to pull a fast one and just declare that the Senate was in recess and appoint who he wanted anyway...Liberals in here argued the usual talking point stuff straight out of the Oval office to repeat over, and over....But we all knew then it was shaky, and now the SC seems to think so as well.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Ok, no lighthearted brevity with this one, just an oldie but goodie...Last year Obama tried to pull a fast one and just declare that the Senate was in recess and appoint who he wanted anyway...Liberals in here argued the usual talking point stuff straight out of the Oval office to repeat over, and over....But we all knew then it was shaky, and now the SC seems to think so as well.

It seems clear to me that we must keep an eye on the man. I think we are safe. But I don't think I would rely on that.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

It seems clear to me that we must keep an eye on the man. I think we are safe. But I don't think I would rely on that.

No doubt...I think unchecked, we may no longer have a congress that matters.....Oh wait....:shock:
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

This is how tyranny is advanced-Obama did this.


Lets hope scotus has it in them.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

I don't believe that any President since Nixon has had his actions so subjected to Supreme Court review as President Obama in the courts 2014 docket.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Contrary to popular belief, Obama did not invent the recess appointment.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

The Constitution states that the President can appoint "inferior officers" without the consent of the Senate. The problem is that the Constitution doesn't define what an "inferior officer" is and the Supreme Court precedent on the matter leaves room for interpretation. The Solicitor General shouldn't be arguing whether or not the President can make recess appointments or what constitutes a recess; he should be arguing that the appointees are inferior officers.
 
Last edited:
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Now that there is a nuclear option, isn't this case really moot?
Could we possibly see the SCOTUS rule on the constitutionality of the "nuclear option"?
Liberals in here argued the usual talking point stuff straight out of the Oval office to repeat over, and over
Would these be the same usual talking points that conservative posters used defending Bush's preponderance of Executuve orders?
But we all knew then it was shaky, and now the SC seems to think so as well.
Did the Dems ever take Bush to Court over EOs ?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

I would agree CJ.
Could it be due to those who are bringing up all of these "firvilous faux" outrages to the SCOTUS?
I don't believe that any President since Nixon has had his actions so subjected to Supreme Court review as President Obama in the courts 2014 docket.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Now that there is a nuclear option, isn't this case really moot?
Could we possibly see the SCOTUS rule on the constitutionality of the "nuclear option"?

Would these be the same usual talking points that conservative posters used defending Bush's preponderance of Executuve orders?

Did the Dems ever take Bush to Court over EOs ?

No, the SCOTUS has not business in getting involved in the nuclear option. The senate can set their own rules per the constitution. But usually rules are not changed in mid stream, they are agreed upon prior to any session and last the whole session, except this one. No SCOTUS, but I would be find placing Reid's nuts in a vice and twisting it in a nuclear fashion.

The use of the nuclear option has made recess appointments moot. At least IMO.

Did you read this: This Is the End of the Senate. It’s Harry Reid’s Fault.

Read more: Harry Reid End of the Senate - POLITICO Magazine
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

I don't believe that any President since Nixon has had his actions so subjected to Supreme Court review as President Obama in the courts 2014 docket.



Comparing obama to Nixon is justified when discussing ethics and political connivance.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Contrary to popular belief, Obama did not invent the recess appointment.



The question at issue is who gets to determine if the Senate is in recess. Is it the Senate or is it the executive? If it is the Executive, then the Senate has ceased to exist.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Now that there is a nuclear option, isn't this case really moot?
Could we possibly see the SCOTUS rule on the constitutionality of the "nuclear option"?

Would these be the same usual talking points that conservative posters used defending Bush's preponderance of Executuve orders?

Did the Dems ever take Bush to Court over EOs ?



What do you feel should have inspired this action?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Contrary to popular belief, Obama did not invent the recess appointment.

Contrary to democrat belief, democrat presidents ignoring the constitution can be challenged. Shocking, right?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

I'm glad to see you've mellowed on Harry since I was gone the weekend.
I'm sure Mitch will be glad to extend the nuclear option to the ACA if the GOP takes the Senate.

This is another decision to prove Linc is correct on his prediction that Sotomayor has joined Roberts and Kennedy in a 3-way.
I don't think she's very happy with the SCOTUS right now and will make a statement, crossing over .
No, the SCOTUS has not business in getting involved in the nuclear option. The senate can set their own rules per the constitution. But usually rules are not changed in mid stream, they are agreed upon prior to any session and last the whole session, except this one. No SCOTUS, but I would be find placing Reid's nuts in a vice and twisting it in a nuclear fashion.

The use of the nuclear option has made recess appointments moot. At least IMO.

Did you read this: This Is the End of the Senate. It’s Harry Reid’s Fault.

Read more: Harry Reid End of the Senate - POLITICO Magazine
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

If you're gonna get ridiculous and compare Obama to Nixon, you may as well compare Christie to Nixon while you're at it.
Comparing obama to Nixon is justified when discussing ethics and political connivance.
Just add these recess appts to the other faux scandals .
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Contrary to democrat belief, democrat presidents ignoring the constitution can be challenged. Shocking, right?

Yet another pointless non-sequitur from Scatt.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Yet another pointless non-sequitur from Scatt.

Yet another pointless non-sequitur from democrat Kobie.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Yet another pointless non-sequitur from democrat Kobie.

I'm not a Democrat. Nice try, though.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

I'm not a Democrat. Nice try, though.

Of course you are, you vote democrat.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Of course you are, you vote democrat.

How do you know who I vote for?

Oh, and this interaction with you ends now. Toodles.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

How do you know who I vote for?

Are you pretending you do not vote democrat?
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

I'm glad to see you've mellowed on Harry since I was gone the weekend.
I'm sure Mitch will be glad to extend the nuclear option to the ACA if the GOP takes the Senate.

This is another decision to prove Linc is correct on his prediction that Sotomayor has joined Roberts and Kennedy in a 3-way.
I don't think she's very happy with the SCOTUS right now and will make a statement, crossing over .

Even if the GOP takes the senate come November, it would do no good to expand the nuclear option to legislative matters. President Obama would just veto any repeal. So unless somehow the repeal could garner 2/3rds vote in both the house and senate, it would be just wasting time. If I was a Republican I would wait until I got a president in the white house before expanding it. But I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Reid doesn't do that first especially if the Dems retain control of the senate. I expect that they will.

I do have a gut feeling that Grimes will come out on top in Kentucky. I was checking into a PPP poll on Kentucky, McConnell has only a 31% approval rating and 61% disapproval. Even if he has more money than Grimes, that will be tough to over come.
 
Re: Justices skeptical of Obama’s recess appointment claim

Even if the GOP takes the senate come November, it would do no good to expand the nuclear option to legislative matters. President Obama would just veto any repeal. So unless somehow the repeal could garner 2/3rds vote in both the house and senate, it would be just wasting time. If I was a Republican I would wait until I got a president in the white house before expanding it. But I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Reid doesn't do that first especially if the Dems retain control of the senate. I expect that they will.
If the SCOTUS goes against Obama, the GOP House will add it to its list of faux reasons to Impeach the POTUS.
Even if the GOP doesn't take the Senate, Linc predicts the House will still Impeach Obama, just in time to ruin the Christmas of 2015.
If the GOP has the Senate, they may as well go ahead and try Mr. Obama,
since the 2016 election will be already be a referendum election, as in 2008 with Bush.
I do have a gut feeling that Grimes will come out on top in Kentucky. I was checking into a PPP poll on Kentucky, McConnell has only a 31% approval rating and 61% disapproval. Even if he has more money than Grimes, that will be tough to over come.

My new feel on the Senate is not on the individual candidates, but on the peripheral influences.
I'll just say the word Christie, since that's all that I need to say on that influence.

Under the radar, we have the asshole Baucus pushing a fast-track TPP that is dividing the Democrats.
The 12 countries literally make up the ring of fire we know of with volcanoes.
This one's a political volcano for the Dems.
There are some good GOPs on this issue with textiles, imports, wages, and jobs, but the Elite GOPs are just eating popcorn.

In particular, Montana will be pissed at Baucus, so I have swung MT to lean R .
 
Back
Top Bottom