Last week, during oral arguments at the Supreme Court, Deputy Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal urged the justices to find that the National Labor Relations Board had authority to act and issue opinions with only two members – as it had for more than two years.
The fact that the Senate had held up the confirmation of President Obama’s three nominees to the board – and had in fact blocked one of the candidates, union attorney Craig Becker, with a failed cloture vote – “underscores the general contentious nature of the appointment process with respect to this set of issues,” Katyal told the justices.
“And the recess appointment power doesn’t work why?” asked Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.
Over the weekend Obama showed that the power does indeed work. With the Senate in recess for more than three days, Obama made 15 recess appointments to administration posts – including Becker to the NLRB.
Late last week Republican senators as well as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce urged Obama not the use the recess appointment power for Becker. They argued that Becker represented a campaign promise made by Obama to unions during the election, and that Becker would essentially push to authorize “card check” unionizations in worplaces after legislation that would have done so lost steam in Congress. Much more on the Becker brouhaha here from Lawyers USA.
Meanwhile oral arguments continue today at the Supreme Court. The justices will hear arguments in cases involving double jeopardy and securities law.
In other news:
Predicting Stevens’ replacement: Since no one else is waiting for Justice John Paul Stevens to actually retire before opining about who might replace him, we won’t either. (Lawyers USA)
Gun law ok’d: A a federal court has upheld the gun regulations enacted in the District of Columbia after the Supreme Court’s ruling in D.C. v. Heller. (The BLT Blog)
Money talk: What’s the impact of the latest federal court ruling rejecting a constitutional challenge by the Republican Party to some federal limits on donations to political parties? SCOTUSblog explains. (SCOTUSblog)