Checks and Balances at Work; Court Rules Obama Recess Appointments Unconstitutional


Senator Chuck Grassley made the following statement after the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that recess appointments made by President Obama on January 4, 2012 were unconstitutional because the Senate was in session.  At the time of the appointments, Grassley, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, led committee Republicans in pressing the administration to release the legal opinion advising on the constitutionality of the appointments.  Grassley also provided context and historical information on the President’s executive overreach in a series of speeches given on the Senate floor.  The text of those speeches can be found at these links.


Constitutionality of President Obama's "Recess" Appointments
Unconstitutional Power Grabs
The Erosion of Checks and Balances

 

Here is Grassley’s statement on today’s court ruling.

 

“This decision is good news for checks and balances, an essential factor in our system of government that safeguards ‘we the people’ against unchecked government power.  The decision reaffirms that the Constitution gives power to the Senate in the appointment process in order to protect individual liberty.  The court’s conclusion is supported by the language, structure and history of the Constitution.  The court goes so far as to condemn the President for defining the scope of his own powers in the appointment process and says it would ‘demolish the checks and balances’ of the Constitution.  And, the court specifically rejects the arguments that the Office of Legal Counsel for the Department of Justice made in support of the President’s actions.  I spoke against these arguments at the time they were made.  The Framers of the Constitution feared the history of tyranny that arose from executive power.  The Constitution provides for presidential nomination and Senate confirmation of appointees for this reason.  The limited exception of recess appointments is a victory for freedom and a lesson to the President to respect legal constraints on his expansive claims of executive power.”