Court: President Obama labor relations panel appointments are unconstitutional

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 2:59 p.m.

    "...during that time, GOP lawmakers argued, the Senate technically had stayed in session because it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called pro forma sessions...".

    We got um...

    even though it was only on a technicality...

    So what...

    we still got um...

    Anyway...technicality notwithstanding...

    The revealing news here is the hide and seek working conditions of the congress.

    Work T, W, TH...

    Anytime they don't want to work during their 3 day work week, they gavel out... yet are technically still working...

    Anywhere else that would be FRAUD.

    However, nice work @ $175,000 per/yr with benefits no less...

    if you can get it.

    F, SA, SU, M they raise money for re-election after re-election after re-election.

    It's a tough job, but someone has to do it...


    "...The three-judge panel, all appointed by Republican presidents..."

    A 3-judge republicon panel always tops a Democratic Administration...

    Howls of laughter from republicons...

    But what about the ACA ruling?

    Howls of laughter from Democrats...

    But wait it gets better...

    "...Either the Senate is in session or it is in recess...".

    We left recess in Elementary School?

    Didn't we?

    Not the Senate.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 9:28 a.m.

    HE should do the only logical thing---fire/terminate the court!

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    Jan. 26, 2013 9:37 p.m.

    All you liberal posters who called for John Swallow to be put on administrative leave while we investigate should be calling for the same for the president.

    But no. Double standard is what it is all about.

  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Jan. 26, 2013 11:37 a.m.

    "The HCA can still be repealed by the congress and make the supreme court ruling and irrelevant..."

    This will not likely happen since it would have to be Republicans and they would need to control all three branches of government... which is an unlikely scenario. That the Democrats had total control is how we got the ACA in the first place. I'm afraid ACA is here to stay in some form or another. The Supreme Court had a great opportunity to kill it by Roberts screwed it up.

    "...Which is what has to be done if we don't want to bankrupt this country and every semblance of persoanl accounts in federal trust and custody."

    This country is already bankrupt. We're on a high right now but will be feeling the results big time in the coming years. God help us.

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 26, 2013 5:09 a.m.

    Its very apparent that Obama is playing to the letter of the law and not the intent of the laws and its about time he be forced to obey them to the fullest intent and meaning. His intentional and criminal acts of defiance cannot be tolerated any longer, including using his postilion of vengeful prejudices to subvert state rights and laws by DOJ and spy agency's with no jurisdiction.

    The supreme courts makes mistakes all the time and the HCA was very much one of their most heinous mistakes in the history of the existence of this government. Especially when the supreme court judge involved was a very close and personal pal of Obama with very biased and wrongfully applying his ruling. They didn't even read the Health care Act so how can there be any semblance of judicial investigation or affirmation of this law.

    The HCA can still be repealed by the congress and make the supreme court ruling and irrelevant issue Which is what has to be done if we don't want to bankrupt this country and every semblance of persoanl accounts in federal trust and custody.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 8:46 p.m.

    old man,

    so when the dems used the same rules to claim they were in session to thwart bush it was OK and bush had to abide by it, but when the repubs tried the same thing, BO could just ignore it? typical dem double standard.

    And it is the senate, not that house, that has advice and consent powers. Just further evidence how little liberals know about or care for that old rag called the constitution.

    "wingnuts" more hate speech from the DNC and MSNBC?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 3:10 p.m.

    So 171 recess appointments by Bush were okay.
    Obama has made 32.
    (Source, Congressional Resource Service)

    One was ruled unconstitutional because the House claimed they had been "in session" when the appointments were made -- even though none of them were actually in Washington.

    I guess it makes as much sense as anything else the GOP wingnuts do.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    Good job Senator Hatch!

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Jan. 25, 2013 2:13 p.m.

    If this stands, so be it. But with these rules in place, grid lock will be the rule of the day, and at some point, the shoe will be on the other foot when a Republican administration will want to get things done - and through silly games, will now be just as confounded in doing the peoples business.

    Just look at the ATF. 6 years without a leader. And the results we have now.... a gun debate out of control because for all purposes there is no longer any legal authority able to manage the laws we do have. Same with judges, and other appointments. The administrative branch will be neutered anytime you have a divided government.

  • Newsjunky Centerville, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 1:39 p.m.

    While I agree that these pro forma sessions — some lasting less than a minute — are a sham, I am glad that the court ruled Obama's actions as unconstitutional. It is just a shame that our elected officials are playing such games instead of doing the jobs we send them to do in Washington. The fact that both sides are doing it is no excuse. Just like it is no excuse that Obama out of frustration take's it upon himself to rule like a king without regard to constitutional powers.

    The system in Washington is broken and gets very little done. The point is not if these pro forma sessions are legal, the point is that the Senators give themself a 3 week vacation instead of battle things out like they are supposed to do.

    While watching the news yesterday, my 9th grader commented that if congress would sit on some hard metal chairs, maybe they would bet things done faster.

  • JimInSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 1:32 p.m.

    I'm beginning to think that Obama studied constitutional law to search for weaknesses or loop holes that he could use to his advantage.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 25, 2013 1:13 p.m.

    Sending billions, and WMD's to the Muslim Brotherhood is constitutional?

    People make fun of Manti Teo, and his false girlfriend, but will beleive Obama is the annointed one.

    Go figure.

  • David Centerville, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 1:06 p.m.

    Pagan, as these other posters pointed out, it was the court that said his appointments were unconstitutional. Please reread the article.

  • UtahBruin Saratoga Springs, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 1:05 p.m.

    Is this surprising at all? I am not sure Obama even knows what the Constitution is. And, Mr. Bean is correct, Obama Care was not deemed constitutional. What surprises me is how people defend him. I seriously do not get it. There are definetely wayward children on both sides of the parties, but this guy is as Un-American as you can get for being the POTUS. How can people not see this guy is playing celebrity, enjoys the publicity and benefits of being POTUS. Really, who wouldn't? But we need someone who is a real President who truly puts country first, not just individuals, individual groups and or minorities. So before you lefties get on your horse and start riding, this same advice goes for the house and senate.

  • Mr. Bean Ogden, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 12:01 p.m.

    "Obama's actions were proven constitutional by the Supreme court in... Healthcare Reform."

    Obamacare has nothing to do with granting amnesty to a certain class of illegal immigrants. Regarding unconstitutional conduct, the US Constitution requires all citizens be treated equally (equal protection under the law). Granting amnesty to a certain class of illegal immigrants (kids up to age 30) violates equal treatment. Amnesty for these people also violates immigration laws passed by the US Congress. On this issue alone Obama could/should be impeached because, in his oath of office he vowed to uphold the Constitution and see that the laws of the land are faithfully executed.

    On your point, the Supreme Court did not hold Obamacare to be constitutional. It held that the governmnet cannot compel anyone to buy anything under the Commerce clause (individual mandate)... specifically health insurance. The Court did hold that the government can collect a penalty for failing to buy insurance under constitutional taxation authority.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 11:34 a.m.


    First, welcome back! Haven't heard much from you until just recently. Hope you are well.

    so when the COURT says Obamacare is OK you agree that it is constitutional, but you disagree when a COURT says BO's action are unconstitutional

    Let me explain again since you seem to have misunderstood the article. The COURT said BO's actions in bypassing the senate were unconstitutional.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 11:09 a.m.

    'That's because a lot of what he does is unconstitutional....'

    This claim is proven wrong. As I had mentioned and given an example. Let me explain again since you are making the claim with zero evidence. Obama's actions were proven constitutional by the Supreme court in...

    Healthcare Reform.

  • Mr. Bean Ogden, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    "Using the word unconstitutional has become popular in regards to anything Obama does."

    That's because a lot of what he does is unconstitutional such as providing amnesty to certain categories of illegal immigrants violating equal treatment under the law. Even his election as president appears to be unconstitutional until his citizenship can be unequivocally confirmed.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 25, 2013 10:20 a.m.


    Didn't we hear this same claim about Healthcare reform?

    How did that work out...?

    Using the word unconstitutional has become popular in regards to anything Obama does. But history has proven that is not the case.