Back in January, President Obama made a controversial recess appointment
while the Senate was in a pro forma session, and named Richard Cordray
as head of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. While the Senate
wasn't holding meetings, it also wasn't technically adjourned, and thus
many Republicans took issue with the president's initiative. They sued
the Obama administration in response, and today, that case came before the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Interestingly, the bench expressed skepticism not only of the particular appointment in question, but of the practice of recess appointments generally, arguing that unless Congress has adjourned for the term, they're not totally in recess. It's an unexpectedly hardline stance -- and some argue, unrealistic -- but nevertheless, two of the three judges hearing the case seemed to be in agreement over it.
Read more: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katehicks/2012/12/05/court_to_obama_not_so_sure_about_your_recess_appointments
Interestingly, the bench expressed skepticism not only of the particular appointment in question, but of the practice of recess appointments generally, arguing that unless Congress has adjourned for the term, they're not totally in recess. It's an unexpectedly hardline stance -- and some argue, unrealistic -- but nevertheless, two of the three judges hearing the case seemed to be in agreement over it.
Read more: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katehicks/2012/12/05/court_to_obama_not_so_sure_about_your_recess_appointments
No comments:
Post a Comment