I've read a couple articles on this so far and don't really have a "definitive" one to link to, but I was curious about people's takes on the matter.
Basics: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was unable to operate for quite awhile because it lacked a quorum. Members had resigned and Republican Senators were filibustering appointments because, well, they don't really want a functional NLRB. Obama then chose to make a recess appointment to fill positions on the board so that it could achieve quorum and do it's job. Other parties sued and now a federal court has ruled that the administration has completely misconstrued the recess appointment powers granted in the Constitution. My take thus far: I'm kind of conflicted. I'm in favor of a functional government and I understand the desire of the administration to circumvent obstruction that was designed to just render an agency moot without actually taking the hit of trying to legislatively kill it. None the less, the arguments made by the Court are very persuasive. Their historical reading of the recess appointment tends to make sense to me and their final conclusion seemed to be "Congress sucks, yes. But it's still their job to do this shit and you don't get to do their job just because they refuse to do it". Seems pretty persuasive to me thus far, but I'm curious how other people are weighing in on the matter. Thoughts? Cheers, Judah ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:360484 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
