Paging Colonel Hogan

[4est_4est_Gump]

What is the law/constitutionality on President Obama appointing a recess SCOTUS seat if Congress does not stay in session?


Just wondering what desperation will attempt.

 

[Disgustipated]

Just wondering what desperation will attempt.

a million pists and a fake black belt.

 

[Conager]

a million pists and a fake black belt.

Just out of curiosity- has anyone (on or offline) ever doubted any of your actual accomplishments or adventures?

It must really suck to have lived a life of staid credulity.

 

[Disgustipated]

Just out of curiosity- has anyone (on or offline) ever doubted any of your actual accomplishments or adventures?

It must really suck to have lived a life of staid credulity.

No.


...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Just out of curiosity- has anyone (on or offline) ever doubted any of your actual accomplishments or adventures?

It must really suck to have lived a life of staid credulity.

I actually provided pictures of my certificates to Laurel...

:shrug:

h8rs have to h8!

 

[Disgustipated]

I actually provided pictures of my certificates to Laurel...

:shrug:

h8rs have to h8!

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!





ha

 

[Lancecastor]

Just out of curiosity- has anyone (on or offline) ever doubted any of your actual accomplishments or adventures?

It must really suck to have lived a life of staid credulity.

Not many people aspire to managing a kampus kopy shoppe.

Do they?

 

[NOIRTRASH]

What is the law/constitutionality on President Obama appointing a recess SCOTUS seat if Congress does not stay in session?


Just wondering what desperation will attempt.

SCOTUS already ruled Obama don't decide when Congress is in session.

 

[Disgustipated]

Not many people aspire to managing a kampus kopy shoppe.

Do they?

Tru dat, lance. BTW, clean up the men's restroom, some loser was jerkin' it to Ivanka and got splooge all over the stalls. After that, replace the toner bottles in the Flux Capacitor.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

SCOTUS already ruled Obama don't decide when Congress is in session.

That's not the question.

Maybe they won't take any holiday recesses, but that would be a very rare thing.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

What is the law/constitutionality on President Obama appointing a recess SCOTUS seat if Congress does not stay in session?


Just wondering what desperation will attempt.

The President does not appoint Supreme Court justices. He nominates Supreme Court justices who MUST be approved by the Senate. Obviously, that approval cannot take place during a recess.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

That's not the question.

Maybe they won't take any holiday recesses, but that would be a very rare thing.

Dear, Congress recesses between sessions. You ask dum questions. Shit like CAN OBAMA SEIZE SANTAS SLEUGH?

 

[BotanyBoy]

The President does not appoint Supreme Court justices. He nominates Supreme Court justices who MUST be approved by the Senate. Obviously, that approval cannot take place during a recess.

He can if the shit heap is in recess apparently.

That being said they are still subject to approval when they come back and without approval the position opens back up again....so it's really only a temporary thing he can do when the Senate just isn't around.

Probably there because 'just in case' because that makes sense but hardly a permanent deal.

 

[ryan8558]

Doesn't that apply to all federal judges not just the supreme court justices?

 

[Conager]

He can if the shit heap is in recess apparently.

That being said they are still subject to approval when they come back and without approval the position opens back up again....so it's really only a temporary thing he can do when the Senate just isn't around.

Probably there because 'just in case' because that makes sense but hardly a permanent deal.

Some things have some wiggle room built into it such as cabinet secretaries and the like where it says with the advice and consent of the Senate. The reason recess appointments were possible is now completely obsolete. There was time and distance to get everyone together to approve such. It was never meant as a back door for the president to do something that the Senate explicitly tells him not to do. If the senate had any spine at all, anyone he appoints during the recess... the day they get back they can impeach. They won't do it, but they can.

Those are actual appointmentees. He has the power to appoint them, he just has to run them by Congress. The way Congress stymies that is by simply lengthening the running it by them time which is why the recess appointment is possible. But not with a Supreme Court Justice.

I can see Libtards urging him to simply announce that he's appointed a Supreme Court Justice and then demanding that Justice be seated. In the unlikely event that someone strolls into the Supreme Court not approved by the Senate, Civil War II breaks out.

 

[ifrtbttrflys]

The Constitution grants the President power to "nominate" someone to the Supreme Court - period. That's it. That's all the constitutional say any President has in the matter.

Only the Senate is constitutionally charged with the power of whether the President's nominee ever sits on the bench or not.

And other than those, the entire Congress is constitutionally charged with doing whatever they desire concerning the Supreme Court, meaning, for instance, by simply majority vote and enactment into law by the President's signature, Congress can command how many Justices actually sit on the Court, etc.

The Judicial and Executive branches were created by the Legislative branch. Neither the Judicial or Executive branch has any constitutional power to remove anyone in the Legislative branch from office whatever, whereas Congress holds full constitutional power to remove anyone of the Judicial and Executive branches from office by first impeaching them and then convicting them.

The Constitution originally and fully empowered the States (through their Legislatures electing their own federal Senators) and the People (by electing their own Representatives) to be the necessary, ultimate checks and balances on any branch of federal government illegally using their office - like any President so foolish to insist he can "appoint" a Supreme Court Justice in any way, shape, or form, and at any time.

Only by returning to that constitutional originalism can the utter Leviathan the federal government has become begin to be reigned in.

 

[sharingfantasies]

Checks and balances so that no one person or group gets too much power. Sometimes it works and sometimes it creates hindrances, but without it, we would not be a republic.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The reason recess appointments were possible is now completely obsolete.

That doesn't mean they can't or won't try to use old shit to their modern advantage.

Fuckin' everybody does that shit, that's 'fuck you' politics 101.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Constitution grants the President power to "nominate" someone to the Supreme Court - period. That's it. That's all the constitutional say any President has in the matter.

You must not have ever read it then because in Article II Section II Clause III rather plainly states that while congress is away, POTUS can play.

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artic...s_Constitution#Section_2:_Presidential_powers

It might not be permanent but if POTUS wants to shove somebody in a spot while congress is out jerking themselves and each other off he can do that.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The President does not appoint Supreme Court justices. He nominates Supreme Court justices who MUST be approved by the Senate. Obviously, that approval cannot take place during a recess.

Thank you.

 

[ifrtbttrflys]

Here's the only constitutional order possibility for anyone to sit on the Supreme Court bench (until the Constitution is amended differently):

1. The President nominates someone.

2. The Senate confirms the President's nomination.

3. Only upon that Senate confirmation may a President then appoint his nominee to the Supreme Court bench.

#2 is constitutionally absolute: it cannot be jumped over for any reason, no matter if Congress is in recess or not.

And "granting Commissions" has absolutely nothing constitutionally to do with the equally absolute process of nominating, confirming, and appointing Supreme Court Justices.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Doesn't that apply to all federal judges not just the supreme court justices?

Yep. In fact, the "hold up" of federal judicial "appointments" is a rather common Congressional tactic.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

This thread did manage to educate.


Not everyone seems to be open to the lesson.