Obama’s Radical NLRB Recess Appointments Ruled Unconstitutional

It’s a setback for the Emperor-in-Chief’s quest to just do whatever he likes because he says so.

Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.

The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions.

The three judge panel consists entirely of Reagan-Bush II nominees, but plenty of those have turned out to be very liberal, so it’s refreshing that three Federal judges have chosen to uphold the law. But the next stop is likely to be the Supreme Court.

The NLRB has become an extension of the union-government complex and the appointments have only made things worse.

Obama’s unconstitutional NLRB appointees included mob-linked union lawyer Richard Griffin, who has just been named in a major lawsuit, and who has continued to receive union money, and union official Sharon Block. Together they have drastically limited workers’ rights while implementing the power agenda of the union-government complex. Now, if this stands, all their job and rights killing decisions have just been invalidated.

  • http://www.adinakutnicki.com AdinaK

    First off, kudos to the judges.
    Most significantly, fiddling with the Constitution is the purview of Obama and his surrogates, regardless of this or that setback – http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/01/07/fiddling-with

    Nevertheless, it is an intrinsic outcome.

    Adina kutnicki, Israel – http://adinakutnicki.com/about/

  • becky

    Did someone wake up? Blinders coming off?

  • Jeff Ludwig

    An important article. I haven't seen this news on any outlet.

    • kasandra

      I just heard about it on ABC Radio Network news at 3:00 p.m. E.S.T. They described it as limiting the President's authority to make recess appointments. They didn't bother mentioning the essential fact – Congress was not in recess when he claimed the authority to make the "recess" appointments. In other words, ABC to the contrary notwithstanding, the decision does nothing to curb a President's legitimate authority to make recess appointments. It only rightly curbs his nonexistent authority to declare, contrary to Congress' own determination, that Congress is not in session and that he thus has the right to unilaterally make appointments without the Senate's advice and consent.

  • pagegl

    I bet this decision gets Obama's knickers in a twist.

  • Mary Sue

    Well at least the Judges that turned out to be "liberal" aren't complete fools.

  • Ghostwriter

    I've heard about this. Most likely,the Supreme Court will uphold the decision of the lower court but I don't really want to make predictions.

    • kasandra

      In the Supreme Court it will be a 5 to 4 decision reversing the DC Circuit with Roberts writing the majority opinion concluding that it wasn't a "recess appointment" Obama made, it was just a "hire" and, therefore, was legal. (Just joking.)

  • JCS

    I'm waiting to hear this reprted on CNN and waiting and waitin and waiting…

  • JacksonPearson

    My question is, if a federal court and appellate, can amazingly find a constitutional question to rule on against Barack Hussein Obama's NLRB appointments, than why can't they as well search Article II to rule on his eligibility, or forged birth certificate? WHY?

  • John E Foddrill sr

    Obama campaign co-chairman / Mayor Julian Castro, City Attorney Michael Bernard ( brother of White House Social Secretary Jeremy Bernard) and other city “leaders” follow in Obama’s footsteps………….. "It's déjà vu all over again"- Yogi Berra

    Texas Public Radio / KSTX reports that San Antonio TX city “leaders” are at the center of a federal civil rights lawsuit being filed by the Texas Civil Rights Project of Austin TX.

    A second lawsuit – SA13CV0051XR- was filed on 1/17/2013 naming City defendants (Mayor Castro, CM Sculley, City Attorney Bernard, Council members (past and present), Chief McManus, etc) in their official AND individual capacities for Constitutional violations including the act of banning a law –abiding citizen from City Hall/Council meetings for reporting long-term, widespread public /police corruption, bond fraud, accounting fraud and the theft/misuse of tens of millions of tax/grant dollars.

    • JacksonPearson

      This kind of Constitutional corruption and usurpation is going on all over the nation.

  • JacksonPearson

    I was over on a liberal web site reading their leftist analysis, and comments. The Libs that were commenting, were crying and peeing all over themselves.

    The DC court of appeals handed Obama a resounding defeat. But as usual, Obama discounts federal courts, and continues business as though nothing have happened. If I am correct, the USDOJ have two months or 60 days to request an en banc hearing, or appeal to the Supreme Court. If he does neither, and his appointees are still in place, then he's in violation of the Constitution. House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell were supportive plaintiffs named in the lawsuit.

    If Obama fails to act, flips off the court's ruling and Congress, well then, things can get Constitutionally dicey for him. To be continued!