Jan. 26, 2913 –
In a court case involving a Washington state employer, it’s also a win for employers and the U.S. Constitution — the supreme law of America. (Read the official text of the U.S. Constitution.)
In a unanimous ruling in January 2013, the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled President Obama has abused the appointment process. The ruling was cheered by Republican critics, as well as by some liberals.
Mr. Obama has been abusing his power by claiming his disingenuous appointments of three political partisans to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) were legal recess appointments.
In truth, the Senate wasn’t in recess but in pro forma sessions meeting every three days.
The court ruled presidents can only make recess appointments between formal sessions of Congress, which normally occur once at the end of the body’s business year. It also ruled Mr. Obama can only make appointments for openings that occur during the same recess.
Checks and balances
So, Mr. Obama has been violating the checks and balances in the Constitution’s advice-and-consent requirement. For 200 years, presidents have been making recess appointments.
But no other president has tried to circumvent Congress by making such appointments under false pretenses.
Since Mr. Obama’s appointments on January 4, 2012, the NLRB has made some 300 decisions —many were huge — that adversely impact employers and help his political supporters.
But now, legal experts believe the decisions will be thrown out because of the unlawful appointments.
This ruling immediately invalidates a dubious action by the board against a Pepsi-Cola bottler in Washington state.
It also means the president’s appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that same day in January 2012 may be nullified. That would include his actions. Many have been dubious.
The court ruling may have other implications for recess appointments by future presidents. Their recess appointment power is in doubt.
Temporarily, the ruling might also stop the NLRB from overseeing labor disputes – the board doesn’t have a quorum with the removal of the three appointees.
Of course, the administration will probably appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Meantime, the court’s decision represents a rebuke to Mr. Obama. He deserves a reproach for many other reasons.
Justifiably, his critics have increasingly condemned his corrosive presidency – such as his refusals to work with Congress, his demand for a blank check on the nation’s debt limit, the $16.5 trillion in red ink and growing, saddling small businesses with his unpopular ObamaCare, his broken promise of transparency, and his failure to create productive policies for family wage jobs.
QE3 (printing money), borrowing billions of dollars from China, the interest on the borrowing now costs 46 cents out of each federal dollar, nearly 50 million Americans on food stamps, and no federal budget for four years — aren’t solutions. Further, the massive debt is grossly unfair for our children and grandchildren, and it’s unacceptable.
So, his disingenuous claims regarding his NLRB appointments typify why many of us are alarmed by his efforts to turn his presidency into an imperial monarchy.
Hurray for the Constitution.
From the Coach’s Corner, see these related articles:
- Obama’s Broken Promise for Transparent Government – Study
- Canadian Study – U.S. States Plummet in Economic Freedom
- The Connection: Unemployment and Obama’s Failure to Convene His Jobs Council
- Inefficiency, Fraud in Healthcare and Insurance – How You Can Help
It’s only unethical if you get caught.
Author Terry Corbell has written innumerable online business-enhancement articles, and is a business-performance consultant and profit professional. Click here to see his management services. For a complimentary chat about your business situation or to schedule him as a speaker, consultant or author, please contact Terry.