Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
April 18, 2014, 04:58:58 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Obama appointments are unconstitutional  (Read 1254 times)
LurkerNoMore
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11628

Tossing sand in your Va-Jay-Jay


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: January 26, 2013, 07:31:28 PM »

The Senate was not in recess - and - O-SHITHEAD does not get to say when recess is or not. 

Hope that helps 

Guess you missed #2, #3, #4, #5 from above.  Not surprising.  So tell me, if they were not even in town, how could they not be in recess?  Enlighten us with the GOP delusions. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Coach is Back!
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 22138


Regarding Obama...I told you so!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 26, 2013, 08:49:42 PM »

Really?  What did your on the Hill source say again?  Please post a link to that statement.  So I can ridicule it.  Again.

What was your question again?

You want me to post a link from my brother in law?? The question was, give one example of a commonsense policy that Obama or the left have enacted or proposed. Example, 5, 7 or 10 bullets? Spending more than we take in and keep borrowing? What the Fuck is an assault rifle? 50000 people killed in auto accidents, should we take away the cars? Dude, I can go on all night with this idiocy.
Report to moderator   Logged
LurkerNoMore
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11628

Tossing sand in your Va-Jay-Jay


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: January 27, 2013, 06:15:18 AM »

You want me to post a link from my brother in law?? The question was, give one example of a commonsense policy that Obama or the left have enacted or proposed. Example, 5, 7 or 10 bullets? Spending more than we take in and keep borrowing? What the Fuck is an assault rifle? 50000 people killed in auto accidents, should we take away the cars? Dude, I can go on all night with this idiocy.

I am sure you can go on all night with idiocy since that cranium of yours has an unlimited supply.

Yeah, post a link from your brother in law.  Then post a link from your reply on here about your so and so on the hill saying Obama was losing.

Let's start the day off with a laugh.  Instead of wandering from appointments to guns to cars and any other bullshit that pops into your head. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6291



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: January 27, 2013, 07:14:59 AM »

The Senate was not in recess - and - O-SHITHEAD does not get to say when recess is or not. 

Hope that helps 




Agreed.  I don't think the SCOTUS will allow Obama to decide when the Congress is in session and when it's not.  But, I think they may give more leeway than just the end of year thing as well...just from a timing perspective that's a lot of nominees all at once.
Report to moderator   Logged
MindSpin
Expert
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 10004


MMA > Boxing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: January 28, 2013, 12:06:36 PM »

Someone needs to photoshop Joe's head on this redneck's body...


* 6349_536981983001743_964550967_n.jpg (53.66 KB, 480x360 - viewed 74 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged

w
LurkerNoMore
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 11628

Tossing sand in your Va-Jay-Jay


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2013, 12:58:21 PM »

Someone needs to photoshop Joe's head on this redneck's body...

LOL!!
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5193


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: May 16, 2013, 12:51:02 PM »




Twitter
RSS Feed
 

Second appeals court invalidates Obama's NLRB recess appointments
 


87

278
 
By TAL KOPAN |
5/16/13 12:10 PM EDT


A second appeals court has joined the D.C. Circuit in ruling that President Barack Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional, concluding that some board actions taken in the wake of those appointments were also invalid.
 
The issue has far-reaching implications for both the NLRB and other boards, including Obama’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has been a frequent target of conservatives and whose director was a recess appointment.
 
The 2-1 decision Thursday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (posted here) found that the presidential recess appointment power is limited to breaks between sessions of Congress, not breaks within sessions or other adjournments during which the Senate might meet in pro forma sessions. The reasoning mirrors that in a ruling of the D.C. Circuit Court in January.
 
(Also on POLITICO: Obama tries to stop the bleeding)
 
The 3rd Circuit case centered on decisions the NLRB made on the authority of three members including Craig Becker, who was appointed by the president on March 27, 2010, while the Senate was adjourned for two weeks.
 
The case was brought by a New Jersey nursing and rehabilitation center whose nurses were allowed to form a union by one such NLRB decision. The facility, New Vista, contended that the board’s decision was invalid because it did not have enough members active when the decision was issued because the naming of Becker to the board was not a valid recess appointment.
 
The NLRB must have three members participate in a decision for it to be valid, and the court found that because Becker was not appointed during a break between sessions of Congress, he was not a valid member of the board and thus invalidated the NLRB’s orders.
 
The opinion, written by Judge D. Brooks Smith, said the recess clause of the Constitution should be read not just to give the president executive power, but also to preserve the “advice and consent” role of the Senate.
 
In his dissent, Judge Joseph. A Greenaway Jr. said the majority’s reading of the clause was needlessly narrow and ignored the Founding Fathers' intent to give the president the ability to act when the Senate is not available to “advise and consent.”
 
The administration late last month petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling on the issue.
 
The decision comes the same day that the Senate Help Subcommittee held a hearing on five nominations to the NLRB. Sen. Tom Harkin said they nominations would be moved next Wednesday.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2013/05/second-appeals-court-invalidates-obamas-nlrb-recess-164150.html




bbbaaaddaaaabbbooommmmm
Report to moderator   Logged
Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6291



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: May 16, 2013, 05:28:45 PM »

And Barry gets hammered again.

So, that's 2 appeals left?  Back to the 3rd circuit and up to the SCOTUS?

No way he wins at the SCOTUS, provided they bother to accept.
Report to moderator   Logged
dario73
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5717


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: May 17, 2013, 06:15:36 AM »

cool story bro

Do you still think it is a mute point?
Report to moderator   Logged
dario73
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5717


Getbig!


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: May 17, 2013, 06:32:40 AM »

Wow, earth shattering news. Definitly worth getting your thong in a knot over.

This indifferent attitude is what has contributed to enabling an unqualified buffoon to violate the constitution in so many levels and has resulted in the recent scandals.
Report to moderator   Logged
Beach Bum
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 39985


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 17, 2013, 03:48:39 PM »



Twitter
RSS Feed
 

Second appeals court invalidates Obama's NLRB recess appointments
 


87

278
 
By TAL KOPAN |
5/16/13 12:10 PM EDT


A second appeals court has joined the D.C. Circuit in ruling that President Barack Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional, concluding that some board actions taken in the wake of those appointments were also invalid.
 
The issue has far-reaching implications for both the NLRB and other boards, including Obama’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has been a frequent target of conservatives and whose director was a recess appointment.
 
The 2-1 decision Thursday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (posted here) found that the presidential recess appointment power is limited to breaks between sessions of Congress, not breaks within sessions or other adjournments during which the Senate might meet in pro forma sessions. The reasoning mirrors that in a ruling of the D.C. Circuit Court in January.
 
(Also on POLITICO: Obama tries to stop the bleeding)
 
The 3rd Circuit case centered on decisions the NLRB made on the authority of three members including Craig Becker, who was appointed by the president on March 27, 2010, while the Senate was adjourned for two weeks.
 
The case was brought by a New Jersey nursing and rehabilitation center whose nurses were allowed to form a union by one such NLRB decision. The facility, New Vista, contended that the board’s decision was invalid because it did not have enough members active when the decision was issued because the naming of Becker to the board was not a valid recess appointment.
 
The NLRB must have three members participate in a decision for it to be valid, and the court found that because Becker was not appointed during a break between sessions of Congress, he was not a valid member of the board and thus invalidated the NLRB’s orders.
 
The opinion, written by Judge D. Brooks Smith, said the recess clause of the Constitution should be read not just to give the president executive power, but also to preserve the “advice and consent” role of the Senate.
 
In his dissent, Judge Joseph. A Greenaway Jr. said the majority’s reading of the clause was needlessly narrow and ignored the Founding Fathers' intent to give the president the ability to act when the Senate is not available to “advise and consent.”
 
The administration late last month petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the D.C. Circuit Court’s ruling on the issue.
 
The decision comes the same day that the Senate Help Subcommittee held a hearing on five nominations to the NLRB. Sen. Tom Harkin said they nominations would be moved next Wednesday.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2013/05/second-appeals-court-invalidates-obamas-nlrb-recess-164150.html




bbbaaaddaaaabbbooommmmm

I know Lurker likes to quote himself.  Will save him a little trouble.    Smiley

Quote
Recess appointments have been blissfully sailing along for 150 years, and, now, when the legislative branch starts playing games with it, the executive branch pays the price.

Great job Party of No!  Except here are a few facts.

1. Republicans refuse to consider his nominations for almost any job. Hundreds of judgeships remain vacant because they simply won't even look at the nominations. Typical of their outrageous obstructionism.

2. At the time of the "recess appointments," Congress was neither in session or in town!

3. Typical of of their obstructionism, before they left town, they passed a resolution saying that, even though no one was in D.C.. they were still in session.

4. The Court, in this ruling, says that they were.

5. Most importantly, they are wrong, and their wrong-headed decision will be overturned. Count on it.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5193


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2013, 03:18:00 PM »

nothing to see here, move along, this will amount to nothing as usual. next time run someone capable of winning so we don't have to witness all this crying

Third federal appeals court invalidates Obama NLRB recess appointment
Associated Press ^  | 7/17/13 | Staff

Posted on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 6:12:18 PM by Nachum

RICHMOND, Va. – A third federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that President Obama´s recess appointments of three National Labor Relations Board members was unconstitutional. A divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals joined federal appeals courts in the District of Columbia and Philadelphia in ruling that the Senate wasn´t really in recess when Obama filled the vacancies during an extended holiday break in January 2012. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the D.C. case. However, the legal dispute may have been resolved politically. Obama on Tuesday nominated two new NLRB appointees to replace those


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Report to moderator   Logged
Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6291



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: July 17, 2013, 05:08:03 PM »

Third federal appeals court invalidates Obama NLRB recess appointment
Associated Press ^  | 7/17/13 | Staff

Posted on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 6:12:18 PM by Nachum

RICHMOND, Va. – A third federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that President Obama´s recess appointments of three National Labor Relations Board members was unconstitutional. A divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals joined federal appeals courts in the District of Columbia and Philadelphia in ruling that the Senate wasn´t really in recess when Obama filled the vacancies during an extended holiday break in January 2012. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the D.C. case. However, the legal dispute may have been resolved politically. Obama on Tuesday nominated two new NLRB appointees to replace those


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...




In order to accept Obama's argument, you have to basically accept that the Executive can dictate when the Congress is or is not in session.  I just can't see that happening at any level.
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3427


I'm about to froth at the mouth!


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: July 20, 2013, 12:43:52 PM »



In order to accept Obama's argument, you have to basically accept that the Executive can dictate when the Congress is or is not in session.  I just can't see that happening at any level.

I don't either, though, as a tangential point I'd argue the practice of Congressional leadership (from both sides of the aisle) of just claiming they're on temporary recess is fucked up, even if technically constitutional (since the House and the Senate each make up their own rules).

The political process has been subverted to score points in the 24 hour news cycle and whip the electorate into a frenzy. These sort of political games make me sick.

I don't know about you but personally I wouldn't mind eliminating the ridiculous provision that gives Senators from the State in which a Judge will be serving de-facto veto power, and requiring that the Senate take up any nominations in a timely fashion (45 days?) and if they don't the nomination is implicitly approved.
Report to moderator   Logged
Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6291



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: July 21, 2013, 06:50:25 PM »

I don't either, though, as a tangential point I'd argue the practice of Congressional leadership (from both sides of the aisle) of just claiming they're on temporary recess is fucked up, even if technically constitutional (since the House and the Senate each make up their own rules).

The political process has been subverted to score points in the 24 hour news cycle and whip the electorate into a frenzy. These sort of political games make me sick.

I don't know about you but personally I wouldn't mind eliminating the ridiculous provision that gives Senators from the State in which a Judge will be serving de-facto veto power, and requiring that the Senate take up any nominations in a timely fashion (45 days?) and if they don't the nomination is implicitly approved.


Agreed.  I don't think it's for the news so much as a power issue.

If the Congress doesn't want the President having the power to put his people into leadership positions, then they should pass a law setting up some process (civil service or whatever 'merit' system they want), and then timely approve what political nominations they leave for the President to decide.

Right now, Obama is filling a ton of important positions with political buddies as do all Presidents.  Sometimes, that's disastrous as in the case of Michael Brown who was running FEMA when hurricane Katrina hit.  He was a lawyer with very little experience in disaster management and got the top spot by being in with Bush.

I'd imagine Barry would veto any type of legislation, so pushing it through seems highly unlikely.

Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!