Why did the nine justices cancel President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board!?
According to Western Journalism, in a rare unanimous decision, all nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the outcome in NLRB v. Canning. The Supreme Court found that President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) were unconstitutional.
The facts of the case involved a soft drink distributor, Noel Canning Company, which had been found by the NLRB to have committed certain unfair labor practices. The finding of unfair practices, however, was rendered by an NLRB that contained three appointees who had been placed on the labor board by President Obama using what he claimed was his recess appointment power. His claim of this power has now been found to have no lawful basis; the appointments have been nullified.
Besides agreeing that Obama’s appointments were unconstitutional, the justices also agree that the normal method of appointment requires Senate approval of the president’s nominations. Principal offices in the government should not be filled by executive action alone but instead with the concurrence of the Senate. Moreover, all nine justices agree that the Constitution does provide for the president to “fill up all Vacancies that may have happened during the Recess of the Senate…” [Article II, Sec. 2, clause 3]—the recess appointment power.
For more information, log onto:
Obama, the man who promised free and affordable healthcare, has crippled the masses with “careless” healthcare and a system which you can’t even log onto and get forthright information and secure real healthcare. Obama seems to have lost his sense of reality and is engrossed more with the benefits associated with his DHS, FEMA, Monsanto and, of course, Wall Street associations.
To see some fascinating and interesting clips regarding the truth about why the nine chief justices refused Obama’s recess power, one can easily log onto: