Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

RECESS APPOINTMENT?.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:07 PM
Original message
RECESS APPOINTMENT?.
RECESS APPOINTMENT?....Just when you thought the various post-election legal nightmare scenarios couldn't get worse. U.S. News & World Report is emailing around some reporting that indicates the Bush White House may be considering a recess appointment (requiring no Senate approval, remember) to replace Chief Justice Rehnquist if he steps down for health reasons:

more
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Richardo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. I thought recess appointments were somehow temporary in nature...
I'll check.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
comsymp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Right
Edited on Wed Oct-27-04 02:13 PM by comsymp
Thought that they were only valid until the beginning of the next Congress?

ON EDIT: Looks like it would last for a year, anyway:

No, both are found in the Constitution in Article II, section 2. Clause 2 gives the Senate the power to advise and consent to nominations, while Clause 3 says:


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.

<snip>

Any recess appointment the President makes during the first session of a Congress will last until the end of its second session . Recess appointments made in the second session of a Congress would expire at the end of the first session of the next Congress. Once this time period has expired, an official would have to receive formal confirmation from the Senate in order to remain in office.

<more>
http://www.c-span.org/questions/week156.asp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richardo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yep. This from the Christian Science Monitor..
"Unlike nominees confirmed by the Senate, recess appointees hold their positions only until a new Senate session begins."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nothingshocksmeanymore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. They are temporary...he can only appoint a recess appt while congress
isn't in session. There is also no law that there must be 9 SCJ's at all times...so he could do nothing (not likely, just sayin')
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. That could happen.........
and I wouldn't be surprised in the least!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truhavoc Donating Member (820 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. Is this really possible? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
molly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. He hasn't resigned nor has he died
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freetobegay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
5. Won't fly
Any ways it would only be temporary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Any lame duck shenanigans would lessen the likelihood of
a gracious Kerry pardon of him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomfodw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
9. Georgie doesn't do anything during recess but...
...steal lunch money from the other kids on the playground and pull the girls' pigtails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freetobegay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. And also don't forget
He also like to resd "the pet goat".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loyalsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
12. I thought this might be a headline to follow
As soon as I saw the article about Rehnquist, I alsmost expected to see this follow-up. In fact, this may be our October surprise.
I am cynical enough to believe that Rehnquist very well may have felt it was his patriotic duty to wait to seek treatment. I can't remember who the nightmare in waiting is. Anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
13. The Dems in the Senate will not fillibuster the reappointment
Edited on Wed Oct-27-04 02:33 PM by wuushew
the current makeup of the Senate is not one that would part with tradition in any ethical or progressive way. What I want to know is even without a recess appointment would a 4-4 SCOTUS be able to decide the outcome of Colorado's Amendment 36?



The strongest argument in favor of the constitutionality of recess appointments to the federal judiciary is the history of the practice. Presidents have made a total of 310 recess appointments to the federal judiciary since 1789, including eleven appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Senate has confirmed 263 of these recess appointees to serve as Article III judges and has rejected only one Supreme Court recess appointee.

http://www.bipc.com/news.cfm?mode=article&article_id=492&practice_id=56
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freetobegay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. If SCOTUS is tied
Edited on Wed Oct-27-04 02:54 PM by freetobegay
The lower courts ruling stands.

ON EDIT: yes they would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Well that would be the 10th Circuit Court
I have no idea whether they are conservative or liberal in ideology. I don't know what other election related non-sense the SCOTUS could interfer in since the Bush v Gore case specifically rules out that being used a precedent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-27-04 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
16. He could do it
Eisenhower did it with Earl Warren. Of course, Eisenhower actually had a mandate... but that hasn't stopped the Chimp yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC