Forty-one minutes ago, Mitch McConnell reiterated that he has no intention of doing his job, something for which ordinary people would be summarily fired. Citing the non-existent “Biden Rule,” he claims that a broad assertion in a hypothetical situation made by Joe Biden in the previous century is somehow a law that Congress must follow.
Screw them. Screw them all. If the Congress refuses to abide by the Constitution, Obama should totally make his latest choice, a man no reasonable individual would have a problem with, a recess appointment. Done deal.
PAD
• 
Although I can sympathize with the idea, the Senate is likely to go through some form or shenanigans involving a couple of Republicans who aren’t up for reelection going into the Senate every few days to make a bookkeeping motion during any weeks when they’re not ALL there refusing to do their jobs. The first opportunity for such an appointment would be after the elections when they go home for Christmas and the appointment would (I believe) only last till January.
So other than as a “Screw you” to the Senate, I don’t think it would have any effect. I don’t think it would be quite worth it at that point.
Yeah, they’ve done that before. And you’re right. They’ll be on guard against that.
Have to admit, brilliant idea. But do they ever recess anymore?
Geez, can Congress be any more childish? I am tired of hearing about how Congress wants to delay the selection and thus not letting the President do his job, simply because they hate him and the Democrats so much. This childish behavior is going to cost them yet another election and they just don’t seem to care a bit.
“Recess” appointment, so much more appropriate considering the republicans are acting like children.
Seriously, have they learned nothing from the TWO (not just one, but TWO) elections they lost to the man they call the worst?
How bad must the republicans be to have lost to Obama twice?
Apparently they don’t understand just how much they are hated that America elected Obama (far from a great president, but not the evil the repubs make him out to be) over the best the GOP had to offer twice…
The Republicans just haven’t gotten the message. They refuse to do their jobs and then they’re confused their constituents flock to someone like Donald Trump for leadership. If they did their jobs and took care of the country they’d be leaders instead of a bunch of dead ducks.
Dave, I could be wrong about this, and hopefully somebody else with a better memory can confirm this, but I seem to recall Obama threatened to make some sort of recess appointment some years back, and the Senate kept one person in the Senate chamber while everybody else was gone so they didn’t have to officially gavel a recess. And you can bet if they smelled the slightest hint of a recess appointment coming up, they would do exactly what you said.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/is-a-recess-appointment-to-the-court-an-option/
Bad move. Gives the Republicans something to yell about and smear the entire Democratic Party with in the campaign.
If it saves the Court and many of its rulings like Roe, it would be worth it.
The word “treason” comes to mind. Oh, maybe “malfeasance” too… I wonder if those have any penalty in the government positions?
More like “nonfeasance”.
Puts me on mid of the story about the SC sheriff who was busted for malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance in office.
Translation: “He didn’t do very much of what he was supposed to do. When he did, he took bribes and payoffs to let a lot of Bad Stuff pass. And what he did try to do right, he screwed up.”
I’ll go a step further: If Mitch McConnell and his cronies in the Senate follow-through on their threat then they should be called upon to resign their positions or be subject to impeachment.
If Mitch McConnell and his cronies in the Senate follow through on their threat then they should be called upon to resign their positions or be subject to impeachment.
Sorry for the duplication. I didn’t think that my first attempt to post took root.
As soon as McConnell shows where this “rule” was turned into OFFICIAL SENATE POLICY, then he (and the other GOPers) can invoke it and have a LEGAL (ie, Constitutional) basis for the GOP’s petulant behavior.
However, it’s NOT a “rule” and has never been so. It was a comment that Biden made as a SUGGESTION for a hypothetical scenario. (That Biden made the comment in JUNE of 1992 suggests he wasn’t intending such an important vacancy be left for more than about 6 months at most.)
It’s also important to realize that several of McConnell’s partners in crime have ADMITTED their obstinacy wouldn’t be there if the “lame-duck President” just happened to be a GOPer. (And you can dámņ well be sure if the President were a GOPer and a Democratic majority Senate were to pull this kind of stunt, the right-wing noise machine would be out in full force demanding the Senate “do their job.”)
Incidentally, I just sent “my” Senator, Jeff Sessions (R, of course), an e-mail telling him to do his job. (Sessions is on the Judiciary Committee so he’s actually more important than McConnell in this regard.) In the e-mail, I also reminded him that he was once nominated for a Federal judgeship (US District Judge for the Southern Alabama District) and that HE got a hearing. Granted, the situations aren’t exactly identical but it wouldn’t have taken much for his nomination to have been obstructed; as it was, his nomination was effectively torpedoed because Democratic Senator Howell Heflin believed Sessions would not have been impartial given some of Sessions’ comments that came out during the hearings–especially his somewhat outdated terminology towards adult Black men (one such man testified that Sessions had called him “boy”).
Honestly, I doubt it’ll do any good but check the membership of the Senate’s Judiciary Committee and see if any of them are your Senators. (www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members) The Committee’s 11 GOPers represent AL, AZ, GA, IA, LA, NC, SC, TX, and UT (both Senators from TX and UT are members of the Committee). The 9 Dems represent CA, CT, DE, IL, MN, NY, RI and VT (both Senators from MN are members). If you live in one of the GOP states (especially IA, as the Chairman is from that state), write him and complain (not surprisingly, all the Committee’s GOP members are men); if you live in one of the Dem states, write him or her and ensure he or she supports holding hearings (thank the person if supportive, complain if not).
First up, the GOP move to say “no vote” was stupid.
That out of the way, let me point out a few things here:
1) There is nothing in the Constitution that requires the Senate to vote up or down on a nominee.
1A) Even if there was, there is no remedy that could compel the Senate to vote if they don’t want to.
2) Obama already tried the recess appointment gambit, and got his hands slapped by the Supreme Court. Obama said that Congress was in recess and put three people on the NLRB. Congress objected, saying they weren’t in recess at the time. The Court ruled that Obama doesn’t have the power to declare Congress in recess; only Congress has that power.
3) Any argument based on something Joe Biden said should be outright rejected, as he has said some of the stupidest things ever said by any politician.
Obama should have gone to the Court and asked that the senate be declared in recess since they were just sending one or two Senators to walk into the chamber and walk out.
As far as i can see, if you don’t have a quorum you’re not properly in session.
If i’d been the Democratic leadership in those days, i’d have sent someone in to demand a quorum call every time the RWNJs tried to pull that stuff.
I believe that was dealt with and the Court held that the Senate was NOT in recess.
Under the Separation of Powers doctrine, each of the branches has exclusive powers that the other two cannot interfere with. Among them is Congress gets to set its own rules for how it operates, including when it’s in recess and when it’s adjourned. In fact, the Constitution specifies that neither House can adjourn without the consent of the other House.
As far as the quorum calls — that might annoy the GOP, but it wouldn’t actually achieve anything. Lacking a quorum simply means that they can’t conduct business, not that they have to be declared in recess or adjourned.
Finally, even if the Senate let Obama sneak in a recess appointment, the appointee would still have to be confirmed by the Senate, or the appointment would expire. Practically speaking, that would mean that the appointment would expire at the end of this year.
There’s also the whole “conflict of interest” thing on the Supreme Court making decisions on their next member. The appointment process is part of the checks and balances, with the Executive exerting a check on the Judiciary through the appointment, and the Legislative exerting its check through the “advise and consent” part. For the Court to get involved in the process would be pretty unconstitutional.
I understand the frustration. I don’t really like it, either. But there isn’t a way to push the issue that would stand up to Constitutional muster.
My only comment… if they’re going to vote “no” anyways (which they surely will), why put the poor nominee through the hearing process?
If Garland got an up or down vote, he’d win.
You really think so?
People have such short and selective memory
Same arguments and tactics when Bush was president
It’s a times like these that I’m glad I live in the Netherlands and not the United States. Because this sound like political [Insert random rude words].
I went to the website of the Louisville Courier-Journal to see if I could enter a letter. I didn’t have to, it seems most of the letter writers are already quite aware of what I wanted to point out, namely that McConnell and the others want the next Justice to be selected by Hillary or Trump, and idea that does not sit well with many Kentuckians. I hope it’s remembered when McConnell and the others run for reelection.
I agree, Peter, but I happen to know the Senate will do enough “pro-forma” sessions over the next couple of weeks so that the Presindent cannot do any absentia decrees.
I agree, Peter, but I happen to know the Senate will do enough “pro-forma” sessions over the next couple of weeks so that the Presindent cannot do any absentia decrees.
They should just confirm the appointment. They definitely won’t like anyone Hillary appoints, and God knows who Donald would appoint.