Page 11 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 232

Thread: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power[W:74:88]

  1. #101
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,343

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Personally I do not think there is anything to study. It is quite clear their appointments were illegal or unconstitutional. But what about all the rulings since their appointments, especially the ones in where they were the deciding votes?
    You know, Pero, I am beginning to think that there must be a small group of people in DC whose only job is to look at the laws we currently live under, and then decide to challenge those - one at a time - that restrict what they want to do! It makes me wonder how we ever managed to become the world leader we are - with all those "outdated" laws in effect. It makes me think it's a damn miracle we survived at all as a country for hundreds of years! I'm aware that our Constitution and Bill of Rights is a thorn in the side of those who want to do what they feel like doing, but that's the way it is. I wonder how many illegal aliens are crossing the border eager to get into Zimbabwe or North Korea!

    Greetings, Pero.

  2. #102
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,763

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Which is definitely a tactic that is reasonable for someone to criticize. But it doesn't excuse acting unconstitutionally.
    Then you are defending stalemate in DC as we know it; defending the games that are being played by obstructionists.
    That with only two NLRB members, they could not have ruled, yet they did.

    Setting precedence for further polarization in our politics; that the Senate will never be in recess due to these phony sessions.
    And preventing the President from faithfully executing his powers to appoint according to the Constitution.

    I hope to see you again some day when the situation is reversed, as it was last decade .
    Physics is Phun

  3. #103
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    01-15-15 @ 03:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,578

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    The Senate was acting as intended by the Founders. Checks against use of power like this are built into our system of government.

    You'll appreciate this more when in a couple of years a Republican is elected President.
    the founders didn't want to have the Senate avoid voting and pretend to be in session........
    Advise and consent does not mean they can put off Presidential appointments they know will pass. That is silly.

  4. #104
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Chicago, Suburbs
    Last Seen
    06-27-14 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    307

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by Sababa View Post
    the founders didn't want to have the Senate avoid voting and pretend to be in session........
    Advise and consent does not mean they can put off Presidential appointments they know will pass. That is silly.
    Sababa, the point is that appointments made by Pres Obama during the so called "recess" he claimed the senate was in would NOT have passed.

  5. #105
    Guru
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    01-15-15 @ 03:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,578

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterLiberty View Post
    Sababa, the point is that appointments made by Pres Obama during the so called "recess" he claimed the senate was in would NOT have passed.
    I am not sure that is true. But even if it was, the Senate has held up tons of the President's appointments. That is not the intent of Advise and Consent.

  6. #106
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,966

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Then you are defending stalemate in DC as we know it;
    If defending the constitution means it leads to stalemate in DC...so be it.

    If you don't like the stalemate then motivate people to vote out those who are causing it (however you view the "cause" to be happening) or work to amend the constitution.

    But no, complaining and whining about "stalemates" isn't magically going to get me to support unconstitutional action, nor is strawmanning me by proclaiming that my stance that the President CAN'T VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION equates to "defending" the action on the part of Congress.

  7. #107
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Chicago, Suburbs
    Last Seen
    06-27-14 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    307

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by Sababa View Post
    I am not sure that is true. But even if it was, the Senate has held up tons of the President's appointments. That is not the intent of Advise and Consent.
    The intent of Advise and Consent was to allow the legislature OVERSIGHT over the Executive branch to prevent presidents from turning a whole branch of government into an entirely partisan wing. And I believe you are misconstruing the intent of "Recess Appointments".

  8. #108
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    You know, Pero, I am beginning to think that there must be a small group of people in DC whose only job is to look at the laws we currently live under, and then decide to challenge those - one at a time - that restrict what they want to do! It makes me wonder how we ever managed to become the world leader we are - with all those "outdated" laws in effect. It makes me think it's a damn miracle we survived at all as a country for hundreds of years! I'm aware that our Constitution and Bill of Rights is a thorn in the side of those who want to do what they feel like doing, but that's the way it is. I wonder how many illegal aliens are crossing the border eager to get into Zimbabwe or North Korea!

    Greetings, Pero.
    Can I issue you an "Atta Girl" for that post?

  9. #109
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,343

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    Can I issue you an "Atta Girl" for that post?
    .. . :

    Greetings, Beaudreaux.

  10. #110
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,928
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Supreme Court rules against Obama over appointment power

    Quote Originally Posted by tres borrachos View Post
    Interesting question, pero. There probably isn't anything that can be done at this point, is there?
    I spent the last half hour searching, from what I have been able to find is that any ruling while these appointed members were part of the board would have to be re-litigated.. On one site it stated the NLRB had made over a thousand rulings since the presidents unconstitutional appointments. Now no one is sure if all their decisions could be overturned in one lawsuit or if it would take a thousand different lawsuits, one for each ruling. Now I am assuming the court would find since the members were appointed unconstitutionally, they would null and void the ruling. But that may not be the case, a judge may decide that the ruling stands, in which case I am sure it will be appealed and eventually end up in the SCOTUS. But now with Reids nuclear option, the president can now just appoint the same people to the NLRB and Reid will get them confirmed.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

Page 11 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •