USApedia

Recess appointment: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Recess appointment (view source)

Revision as of 23:16, 21 December 2024

8 bytes removed ,  21 December 2024
m
Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times"
VisualWikitext
m (1 revision imported: Imported from Wikipedia)
m (Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times")
Line 55: Line 55:
===Obama's challenge ===
===Obama's challenge ===
Regardless of the Senate continuing to hold [[pro forma]] sessions, on January 4, 2012, [[Barack Obama|President Obama]] appointed [[Richard Cordray]] and others as recess appointments.<ref name=SbCOtbsn>
Regardless of the Senate continuing to hold [[pro forma]] sessions, on January 4, 2012, [[Barack Obama|President Obama]] appointed [[Richard Cordray]] and others as recess appointments.<ref name=SbCOtbsn>
{{cite web|url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-rt-us-financial-regulation-cordraytre80312j-20120104,0,1634538.story|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120108080740/http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-rt-us-financial-regulation-cordraytre80312j-20120104,0,1634538.story|url-status=dead|archive-date=January 8, 2012|title=Stymied by Congress, Obama to boldly seat nominees|access-date=2012-01-05|date=2012-01-04|work=[[Chicago Tribune]]|author1=Clarke, Dave|author2=Matt Spetalnick|name-list-style=amp}}</ref><ref name=DROtNCaCAC>{{cite web|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/defying-republicans-obama-to-name-cordray-as-consumer-agency-chief/|title=Defying Republicans, Obama to Name Cordray as Consumer Agency Chief|access-date=2012-01-05|date=2012-01-04|work=[[The New York Times]]|author1=Cooper, Helene|author2=John H. Cushman, Jr.|name-list-style=amp}}</ref><ref name=BSOACC>{{cite web|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/us/politics/richard-cordray-named-consumer-chief-in-recess-appointment.html|title=Bucking Senate, Obama Appoints Consumer Chief|access-date=2012-01-05|date=2012-01-04|work=[[The New York Times]]|last=Cooper|first=Helene|author2=Steinhauer, Jennifer|author2-link=Jennifer Steinhauer}}</ref> [[White House Counsel]] [[Kathryn Ruemmler]] asserted that the appointments were valid, because the ''pro forma'' sessions were designed to, "through form, render a constitutional power of the executive obsolete" and that the Senate was for all intents and purposes recessed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/obama-tempts-fight-over-recess-appointments/|title=Obama Tempts Fight Over Recess Appointments|first=Charlie|last=Savage|website=Thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com|date=January 4, 2012|access-date=December 10, 2016}}</ref> Republicans in the Senate disputed the appointments, with [[Senate Minority Leader]] [[Mitch McConnell]] stating that Obama had "arrogantly circumvented the American people" with the appointments. It was expected that there would be a legal challenge to the appointments.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-financial-regulation-cordray-legal-idUSTRE80328G20120105|title=Analysis: Obama consumer chief decision under a legal cloud|date=January 5, 2012|website=Reuters.com|access-date=December 26, 2016|via=Reuters}}</ref>
{{cite web|url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-rt-us-financial-regulation-cordraytre80312j-20120104,0,1634538.story|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120108080740/http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-rt-us-financial-regulation-cordraytre80312j-20120104,0,1634538.story|url-status=dead|archive-date=January 8, 2012|title=Stymied by Congress, Obama to boldly seat nominees|access-date=2012-01-05|date=2012-01-04|work=[[Chicago Tribune]]|author1=Clarke, Dave|author2=Matt Spetalnick|name-list-style=amp}}</ref><ref name=DROtNCaCAC>{{cite web|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/defying-republicans-obama-to-name-cordray-as-consumer-agency-chief/|title=Defying Republicans, Obama to Name Cordray as Consumer Agency Chief|access-date=2012-01-05|date=2012-01-04|work=The New York Times|author1=Cooper, Helene|author2=John H. Cushman, Jr.|name-list-style=amp}}</ref><ref name=BSOACC>{{cite web|url= https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/us/politics/richard-cordray-named-consumer-chief-in-recess-appointment.html|title=Bucking Senate, Obama Appoints Consumer Chief|access-date=2012-01-05|date=2012-01-04|work=The New York Times|last=Cooper|first=Helene|author2=Steinhauer, Jennifer|author2-link=Jennifer Steinhauer}}</ref> [[White House Counsel]] [[Kathryn Ruemmler]] asserted that the appointments were valid, because the ''pro forma'' sessions were designed to, "through form, render a constitutional power of the executive obsolete" and that the Senate was for all intents and purposes recessed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/obama-tempts-fight-over-recess-appointments/|title=Obama Tempts Fight Over Recess Appointments|first=Charlie|last=Savage|website=Thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com|date=January 4, 2012|access-date=December 10, 2016}}</ref> Republicans in the Senate disputed the appointments, with [[Senate Minority Leader]] [[Mitch McConnell]] stating that Obama had "arrogantly circumvented the American people" with the appointments. It was expected that there would be a legal challenge to the appointments.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-financial-regulation-cordray-legal-idUSTRE80328G20120105|title=Analysis: Obama consumer chief decision under a legal cloud|date=January 5, 2012|website=Reuters.com|access-date=December 26, 2016|via=Reuters}}</ref>


On January 6, 2012, the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] [[Office of Legal Counsel]] issued an opinion regarding recess appointments and pro forma sessions, claiming, <blockquote>"The convening of periodic pro forma sessions in which no business is to be conducted does not have the legal effect of interrupting an intrasession recess otherwise long enough to qualify as a "Recess of the Senate" under the Recess Appointments Clause. In this context, the President therefore has discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess appointments".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.justice.gov/olc/memoranda-opinions.html |title=OLC: Opinions by Date and Title  |access-date=2012-02-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120118145608/http://www.justice.gov/olc/memoranda-opinions.html |archive-date=January 18, 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.justice.gov/olc/2012/pro-forma-sessions-opinion.pdf |title=Lawfulness of Recess Appointments During a Recess of the Senate Notwithstanding Periodic Pro Forma Sessions |access-date=2012-02-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120118153021/http://www.justice.gov/olc/2012/pro-forma-sessions-opinion.pdf |archive-date=January 18, 2012 }}</ref></blockquote>
On January 6, 2012, the [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] [[Office of Legal Counsel]] issued an opinion regarding recess appointments and pro forma sessions, claiming, <blockquote>"The convening of periodic pro forma sessions in which no business is to be conducted does not have the legal effect of interrupting an intrasession recess otherwise long enough to qualify as a "Recess of the Senate" under the Recess Appointments Clause. In this context, the President therefore has discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess appointments".<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.justice.gov/olc/memoranda-opinions.html |title=OLC: Opinions by Date and Title  |access-date=2012-02-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120118145608/http://www.justice.gov/olc/memoranda-opinions.html |archive-date=January 18, 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.justice.gov/olc/2012/pro-forma-sessions-opinion.pdf |title=Lawfulness of Recess Appointments During a Recess of the Senate Notwithstanding Periodic Pro Forma Sessions |access-date=2012-02-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120118153021/http://www.justice.gov/olc/2012/pro-forma-sessions-opinion.pdf |archive-date=January 18, 2012 }}</ref></blockquote>
Retrieved from ‘https://openusaproject.com/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/16876’