Bolton's recess appointment is UNCONSTITUTIONAL

[paineinthearse]

As the 109th Congress will be in existance through January 20, 2007 (approx), and whereas the Constitution defines the role of the Senate, with repect to the Executive, "...by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors...", and whereas the Senate has given to advise or consent, * has no authority to override the Framers' intentions and Boloton's elevation to the rank of Ammbassador is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors , other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

[quaoar]

1. Yes

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the end of their next Session" (II, 2, 3).

http://slate.msn.com/id/1002994/

[City Lights]

12. But the vacancy didn't happen during the recess of the Senate.

:shrug:

[Fiona]

2. It's not an amendment

it's in the constitution proper.

"The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the end of their next Session" (II, 2, 3).


It has been interpreted by courts to mean that the appointment can occur during any recess, whether or not the vacancy itself occurred during a recess.

[wiggs]

8. I didn't know that

Do you have a link or more info regarding how courts determined that the president can just wait till a recess then appoint whomever he wants?

I know there is precedent in previous administrations, but that doesn't mean it is constitutional.

[ironman202]

3. go here

Section 2.


The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.



http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article02/index.html

[paineinthearse]

7. Clause 3

Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Thank you, I didn't read far enough.

[elperromagico]

4. Theoretically, Bush could fill almost any vacancy during a recess.

Of course, that wouldn't be wise... which makes me wonder why Bush hasn't tried it yet.

[SlipperySlope]

5. It is just temporary though, right?

[Hardrada]

10. Shrub's presidensity is temporary

we hope!!

[mike_c]

6. more info here....

www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RS21308.pdf

[warrens]

9. It's constitutional. Sleazy, ill-advised and arrogant, but legal

[Dervill Crow]

11. Seems to me it's legal only if you can't correctly diagram a sentence.

Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Seems like Bush, et al, are reading this to mean:

Clause 3: The President shall have Power during the Recess of the Senate to fill up all Vacancies that may happen, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Not at all the same thing, and I'm sure not at all what the framers of the constitution had in mind.

Damn those morans.

edited because it's embarrassing to realize I have made a typo while ridiculing someone else's lack of intelligence.

[AJH032]

13. Does it matter?

Do you think Bush and the Republicans care what is constitutional and what isn't? They do what they want to do, not what the constitution says. A few examples, besides this one come to mind (Clinton impeachment, attempt to redefine marriage, Bush's 2000 selection...).

[City Lights]

14. You're right.

The pukes also ignored the fact that the _{deranged toddler} and cheney both lived in Texas. Remember how the big dick ran back to Wyoming to change his voter registration before he picked himself as veep? The pukes have been wiping their asses with the Constitution for some time now.

[Silverhair]

15. Remember, Clinton made over 140 recess appointments.

By screaming about W recess appointment when our guy made that many only makes us look like hypocrites.

[CatholicEdHead]

16. Are we talking "Founders Intent" here?

Or the "Strict Constiutionalist" style? (kind of ironic, since the GOP views that in a differentw ay.

[StevieM]

17. I actually don't agree.....

there's nothing unconstitutional about it. The real scandal is that a majority of the Senate was willing to vote for this idiot.

Not that it matters too much IMO. Bush makes the policies, not Bolton, and no matter whose in his cabinet, all the policies will be awful.

Steve