Over nearly 238 years of American history, the Supreme Court has never had to review the Presidents authority to temporarily fill vacant executive offices when Congress is adjourned. Mr. Obamas 2012 maneuver to void the Senates advice and consent role triggered a judicial intercession, and defeats at the High Court are seldom as total as this one. ... The Framers did not vest the executive with the unilateral appointment authority that Mr. Obama thinks he is entitled to. They wanted to diffuse power across the federal government to protect individual liberty. Wilfully bypassing advice and consent also subverts political accountability, which a former constitutional law professor ought to know. ... But the true import of Noel Canning is that even liberal Justices are alarmed that Mr. Obamas executive law-making is visiting real damage on the Constitution. This will not be the last legal torpedo aimed at the hull of his increasingly willful Presidency.
Posted on: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 22:54:14 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015