E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The Justice Department concluded in a Jan. 6 memo to the White House counsel that the Senate's "pro forma" sessions don't actually interrupt a congressional recess.
Because they don't, the president was entitled to exercise his constitutional power to make recess appointments, the department concluded.
President Obama used that authority last week to name Richard Cordray director of the newly formed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He also made additional recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.
"The Senate could remove the basis for the president's exercise of his recess appointment authority by remaining continuously in session and being available to receive and act on nominations, but it cannot do so by providing for pro forma sessions at which no business is to be conducted," says a memo from DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel.
The memo was released today in response to calls for a fuller explanation of the legal basis on which the White House acted.
The question, the Justice Department says, is a practical one: During these pro forma sessions, is the Senate actually able to provide advice and consent to nominations? Obviously not, the memo says, which makes them a "recess" in name only, and not in substance.
Even so, it says, "the question is a novel one, and the substantial arguments on each side create some litigation risk for such appointments."
Leave a Comment:
I wonder if baynor and paul and grover and the rest are doing their town halls. Talking to their corporations/ people. Thats right, paul is stumping for his pop/ bozo. I suppose the rest are hard at work listening to their supporters ,ha. I guess their just doing it in secret, kinda incognito. Obama should give them another month, so they can't mess the economy up any worse than they have already. Heck, tell them they earned it. All that nothing they did last year. Pizza as a veg. Oh yea they did reinstate our motto. Done, they diserve another month or two? Tell them to take the whole year while their at it. I bet if they did their approval rating would go up?
Would you expect Eric Holder not to back anything and everything Obama does? The man is a political hack. but it really doesn't matter what he thinks. What matters is whether or not Congress and/or the Courts believe Mr. Obama has committed a violation of the Constitution. And under the Constitution, the Senate and the House are the sole deciders of whether or not they are in recess, not Obama.
The Senate was in recess. "Pro forma" literally means in form only, not in substance. Surely nobody wants to see our government holding our Constitution hostage by playing games like children. As long as no business was being conducted, they were in recess. But you are correct, that the Senate could have chosen to not take a vacation if they had wanted to.
Clotho---They did in "07" against Bush.
Republicanns weed a break to get away form it all. Let them have it. they are even worse in session then in pro-forma ones.
At 9% apporaval not much will happen anyway.
The Failed President is both a liar, loser, and is destroying America. Secret Service personnel have stated he is a dishonest person and his wife hates white people. He is a very dangerous man and ignores the law in general, the will of the American people, Congress, and the Constitution.
There are no longer massive adoring crowds to deceive. For the first time in Barack Obama's life, he is accountable. He has repeatedly shown that he cannot deal with, and will never be able to shoulder responsibility, as he is at his core a self-absorbed man, and a very dishonest human being.
Obama has never stood for individualism, capitalism, or liberty. The citizens of our country naively gave the reins of power to a tyrant. The White House has been marginalized and he has proven himself to be the most inept president in modern history. He is symbolic of a man who has downgraded the White House, the Constitution, human life, foreign policy, race relations, and America herself.
His resignation from office would be a great first step toward economic recovery. The majority of Americans are sick of his condescension, his policies, his racist bigotry, and his incompetence. Obama is “the most disastrous president in our history.”
This is the most corrupt, incompetent, dangerous tyrannical administration in American history.
You meant President Bush right?
To..Mrs
No he isn't .. and no it's not...
Are you you a blind ignorant old fool who has issues with remembering anything. first off didnt bush created this mess we are in today. dont forget that under bush so called leadership the rich became richer and the middle class was sold off to speculators and bankers selling false mortgages. I dont know if to feel sorry for you or pitty you. You sound like the fat bloat on the radio and those morons on fux and friend. I hope you are not a christian because if you are get on your knees and pray for forgiveness. they shalt not speak false witness of thy neighbor. hmmm or how about this one. work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. oh yeah i went there. just try and remeber 8 years of lie and corruption can not be pushed clean in 4 years. number doesnt add up.
Please, get back on your meds. Really.
Are you joking? No one in the Secret Service EVER comments on something like that....you are a fool if you believe it.
Plus...you have some real issues here. If large numbers of voters agree with you, we'll elect someone else in Nov and get back on track. You seem to think one President has the ability to single-handedly ruin our country....not so. Maybe...just maybe, you're wrong. Ever think about that?
An awful lot of people receive all kinds of crazy, stupid, racist things through facebook or e-mails, and they so want to believe they never bother to fact check. That is clearly what we're seeing here.
magnis #29.3,
Watch the report from Frontline.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/
BTW, this started on Clinton's watch.
Mrs. Willard et al,
Please take your meds. I'm worried about you...
But Obama doesn't care if it leads to costly and divisive litigation (or worse a Constitutional crisis), as long as he gets to do what he wants he doesn't care what price the nation has to pay for it!!!
Newt spent hundred of millions because of a blow job. That was well spent wasnt it?
No the money was spent not because of a blow job, it was spent because Clinton decided to lie under oath. Regardless, are you arguing that Obama should be allowed to disregard the Constitution because of some other screw up another politician may have made in the past? Great logic there buddy.
He hasn't disregarded the Constitution. When Democrats played the pro-forma game. they actually held sessions. The Republicans can't claim a pro-forma session without doing work.
To..kingK""
Huh...? and what was the '"lie" about...
wasn't obama a law school professor? what was his specialty? i'm just curious...
Constitional lawyer, I believe that was the title. Seems that is the problem for the Gop congress and those who believe in them.
drmrguy, no one knows. Obama's records are sealed.
Yes, the President was a Constitutional Law Professor at the University of Chicago. This is one of the country's leading schools and not one that employs hacks. By the way, how many of those who deride his knowledge of the Constitution do you suppose have actually read it? I suspect that most are like Christine (I'm not a witch) O'Donell, who did that but didn't know what was in the First Amendment.
Personally I believe Obama's position is correct, but what difference does it really make to have justice department support? The final arbiter of what is permissible will be the courts. Until someone challenges Obama's actions in court, and the President loses, he can make recess appointments when Congress is in pro forma session. His actions sound reasonable to me, especially when what they are doing is a thinly veiled effort to stop anything the President attempts.
Yup....pretty much sums it up. Most of these idiots don't get it.
Not to mention, Republicans really can't afford politically to challenge the President's decision in court. They've been holding up implementation of the consumer watchdog bureau that they voted for, as well as the regulation protections contained in Dodd-Frank that will actually help protect Americans. Do they really want to publicly fight against average Americans?
Although the Democrats did the same thing to Bush, there is a distinction. They thought John Bolton was a terrible choice for the UN (and they were right). Republicans have no issue with Obama's selection. They are simply trying to stop the Consumer Protection Bureau from getting to work, so they oppose every choice that the President makes. What is hilarious, is that Elizabeth Warren may end up becoming a Senator because they wouldn't let her run the Bureau she created.
Not correct. The Frank-Dodd bill, which created another consumer wacthdog bureau was a dem bill with no or very little repub support save for maybe Scott (R-MA)
Well of course it was passed without Republican support. They won't agree to anything that they think will help Obama get reelected. Now, you do realize that the Constitution doesn't say that the minority has to agree before you can pass legislation, don't you? Except for confirmation of treaties, I believe it only takes a simple majority and a president's signature to make it law.
Keep in mind that it is ok for a Repug President to do the same thing. But NOT OBAMA!!!!!
Keep in mind that when Harry Reid said that the Senate was in session by coming in every couple of days and pounding the gavel that Bush NEVER made a recess appointment during that time. He actually RESPECTED the rules.
Obama, with the Senate doing the exact same thing, showed no RESPECT for the rules and instead made illegal appointments.
You know, if you actually did a little RESEARCH, instead of just repeating filth, you might get a little enlightenment of what the TRUTH really is.
actually that is you are mis informed. the bush administration did make those appointments. also how long where those sessions. did they last as long as the ones that went on this past december, 30 seconds is a session. All presidents make recess appointments when congress sit on their hands. plus the appointments bush made had problems with the people being appointed. This congress did not have a problem with the person but the agency. as a congressional figure if you dont like the law then have the balls to bring up or amend the law in a session, not hold up the naming of the person the whole senate approves of. thats corruption in itself.
To Chery"""
Bush made several recess appointments ...one off the top of my head ..bolton to the UN.....little research maybe
CherylLM
According to the Congressional Research Service, President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments. President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, and as of December 8, 2011, President Barack Obama had made 28 recess appointments.[5]
learn to do some research yourself before actually trying to lie to others CherylLM
It is hardly demonstrated to be the 'same thing'. Recess appointments are made by all Presidents when Congress is not in session....the Senate is attempting to 'be in session' to prevent it. It is not like Bush, Clinton, or anybody else...pay attention, you moron!
here you go.... obama is off the scale intellegent...food for thought...he and the gops sat down to discuss the dept problem..it seems as if they come to terms.. then the tea baggers got in there and f(*ed that one up....obama finally throws up his hands and tells the house/congress to handle it..he then sits back and watches the gop and tea baggers hold up any hope of getting the dept problem on track...he sat back (with other matters of the country that needed to be done) watches the gop slit their own throats..at that point he assured he will be in the office again...i just wish he didn't cave in....it was the gop party came pretty close to letting the country in go into default...gotta love that one...by by gop...obama 2012
Awww...republicans and teabaggers are still butthurt over this.
Get used to that feeling, republicans and teabaggers. There's LOTS more of this to come.
while some of you do not understand the law and other do not understand the congressional rules, its simple congress should not have a vacation time frame. you want vacation go work in the private sector or take a federal job out of congress. the old congress did not take vacations.
If congress did not want the president to make appointments they could have stayed in session and not hold a 30 second bit to try and say they are in session.
The president made his appointment because congress did not want to do there job. He did his duty more then 11 months ago but congress namely the republicans sat on doing there duty. they did not have a problem with the man but the agency they voted on to create. the republicans want to limit this agency so the president said enough. I will make the appointment which is legal and the JD which is over the judgeship of the us except the USSC has determined that no legal woes have happen.
its simple people either you are at work or you are not. there is no oh i am there for work if i show up for 30 seconds or a few minutes then leave. No real job would except it so why are so many of you excepting it.
wow, Magnis...thanks for that tutorial from your new position on the US Supreme Court....maybe we should let the Supremes settle this (I think it's their job, actually)....if anybody in Congress thinks Obama did wrong, take it to court. If they don't, then they should shut up....that goes for both sides of the isle
Thank you very much but, actually no its not their job. if a case which comes through the justice department is argued in a lower court then it can be heard next by a 3 panal judgeship then the supremes might hear it. the JD has spoken and as such wont bring the case up. if the repubs want to bring it to court they have to sue the actual united states of america. they can use their congressional budget but i think they need a majority of to do so.
its so funny how bush made 171 reccess appointments yet obama is on what his 28 out of 4 years lol. grow up repubs. like i said if you dont like the law then grow a pair and amend it. dont hold up the guy who is to head it.
Magnis, It's you that is missing the point, yes Bush did make 171 recess appointments, but he did not make any while Senator Reid declared pro forma sessions. Bush respected the rules of the Senate, and Obama does not.
Your last paragraph shows that you do not understand the constitution or how the congress operates. The constitution states that both houses of congress can make their own rules and procedures as to how they will operate. No where does it say that the President has the authority to decide when the congress is or is not in session.
Obama making these appointments during the pro forma session shows just how much of a hypocrite he is. It was o.k. when Reid did it and Obama was a member of the Senate, but not o.k. now, just like he was a against increasing the debt ceiling as a Senator because he showed a lack of leadership, but now he is the President he's o.k. with increasing the debt ceiling.
Back to the recess appointments it will not be challenged in the courts by congress, as the courts really don't like to get involved between squabbles between the President and Congress unless it is over a law. I believe some business will challenge the legality of the appointment when the first rules are published and demand compliance.
for the person who siad that the secret service told anyone about what goes on in the white house is pure bs... they would have been on the outside looking in in about 2.5 seconds.. they are sworn to keep everthing that happens in the white house secret...
magnus... don't forget the summer recess!! maybe they will for go that one....lol...i seriously doubt it...
An unbiased opinion from Eric "I haven't seen the AK-47s, Boss, Promise" Holder....what a surprise.
Well, If Eric Holder says it, it must be true. Right? RIGHT???
I think this fellow Obama appointed had better keep his job prospects open. He will be dismissed in January 2013 by President Romney.
gateway.. thank you for that...i already knew, i just wanted to see how many idiots here that don't have a clue!!!! a slap on the back for you!!!!so if anyone knows the cons. law.....need i say more?
and people.. i'm from ma and he ain't what you think he is!! he pumped up our debt while in office...didn't he miss manage the olympic budget....buisnessman my a$$..beware people....
lol romnie to beat obama, yeah right. lets see more the half the country dont want to go to another useless war yet all the rubs want another war oh wait except ron paul. he seems nice but from overall hes that crazy old man you just nod your head to just to be nice. some ideas aare cool but some are just smoke a mirrors. romnie is a joke in a half. i like firing people. oh it was out of context. no you like firing people. hell you did fire people and made a buck or a few million from that action too. a good leader would make sure others are taken care of before himself. that is a true leader.
What this is news ?? .... Holder is Obumas bitch and everyone knows it . just like immigration does whatever he wants ....king Obuma
Are there any surprises here? Obama and the Democrats make the rules as they go to suit their agendas. They did the same to stop Bush as the republicans did to stop Obama but today we change the rules again. Just as they changed the law to replace Kennedy. But hey, you do not dare oppose it or Obama and Holder will play the race card again.
get some knowledge will. you are lacking much in your statements of history
According to the Congressional Research Service, President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments. President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments, and as of December 8, 2011, President Barack Obama had made 28 recess appointments.[5]
magnis-----Yes Bush did until Obama and the Democrats use the same tactics to stop Bush. See below and then tell my what knowledge I am lacking.
Congress forced recess appointments – USATODAY.com
www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/.../story/...recess-appointment.../1
3 days ago – In late 2007, Senate Democrats began using brief, "pro forma sessions" to stop President George W. Bush from making recess appointments. ...
magnis---Also read how the Democrats changed a law they wrote earlier so the Democratic Gov. could appoint a Democrat to the Senate.
Editorial - Replacing Senator Kennedy - NYTimes.com
www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/opinion/25tue2.html
Aug 24, 2009 – Allowing the governor to appoint the next senator in Massachusetts would be undemocratic. They should keep the current system that allows ...
Again please tell me the knowledge I am lacking.
anybody but crackhead in 2012
Republicans were for it before they were against it. This type of appointing and the filibuster are great tools when Republicans use them, but unconstitutional for Democrats. Republican dogma makes everything conditional.
On a similar note, Gingrich said yesterday that he created eleven million jobs while Clinton was president. Boehner claims that Obama has created no jobs while he has been speaker. He may not know that legislation is the duty of Congress. On the morning of the day Obama went to meet with Republicans in Congress, Boehner sent a memo out instructing members to oppose everything Obama presented, and that has continued for three years.
Boehner has also complained that Obama has not shown leadership in the House of Representatives. Would somebody tell the poor fool what his job is?
Repugs are for many things...until their opposition does the same...RE: Romney taking Obama quote out of context, then whining when it is done to him.
The Obama Administration Justice Department supports the recess appointments? Now that's a surprise.
While I too agree with the validity of the recess appointments, this really isn't news, is it?
When do the jack wagons come back to start their obstructionists act again? They should just stay away and let Obama make some more appointments. The Repubs are a total waste of time and have done nothing that has really benefited the working class.
Obama did the recess appointments because the Republicans wouldn't even allow a vote on the appointments. They were road blocking a much needed appointment for political points. They hold pro forma sessions only because they didn't want to him to do what he is legally entitled to do as president. Those of you knocking him for it should go back and see how many recess appointments Bush made. You'd be shocked how many times he went around congress this way.
Clinton made 139 recess appointments 95 to full-time positions. Bush made 171 recess appointments 99 were to full-time positions. As of January 5, 2012 President Obama has made 32 recess appointments all to full-time postions. Come on conservatives lets just look at the facts and stop the non-sense.
Except no conservative was so bold to appoint one when Congress was not in recess.
uhmmm, someone does not know how to read. whats that word before the number recess appointment. congress was on holiday recess. means they not in town and they leave proformas every time they are out in recess
Devdoc you are incorrect. The deomcratic congress under Bush tried the same thing republicans in congress tried this time. They held fake one minute sessions in congress trying to argue that the president could not make a recess appointment because congress was not on recess. It did not work for democrats then and also did not work for republicans this time. I think you have your facts all mixed up, a president can not make a recess appointment if the congress is in session(i.e. not on recess).
ignore my last sentence Devdoc i miss read your sentence.
On holiday recess per the Obama administration, "pro forma" per Congress.