Roger Pilon, a constitutional scholar from the CATO Institute, makes a compelling case that President Obama’s outrageous appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are unconstitutional:

All of Obama’s appointments yesterday are illegal under the Constitution. And, in addition, as too little noted by the media, his appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is legally futile. Under the plain language of the Dodd-Frank Act that created the CFPB, Cordray will have no authority whatsoever.

Yesterday, Professors John Yoo and Richard Epstein, writing separately, made it crystal clear that the president, under Article II, section 2, may make temporary recess appointments, but only when the Senate is in recess. Add in Article I, section 5, and it’s plain that the Senate is presently not in recess, just as it wasn’t under Senate Democrats when George W. Bush wanted to make recess appointments. The difference here is that Bush respected those constitutional provisions while Obama — never a constitutional law professor but only a part-time instructor – ignores them as politically inconvenient. Attempts by Obama’s apologists to say the Senate is not in session are pure sophistry and, in the case of Harry Reid, rank hypocrisy, as this morning’s Wall Street Journal brings out.

But clear beyond the slightest doubt is the language of the statute (itself unconstitutional on any number of grounds not relevant here). As my colleague Mark Calabria wrote yesterday, “authorities under the Act remain with the Treasury Secretary until the Director is ‘confirmed by the Senate.’”  A recess appointment, even if it were constitutional, is not a Senate confirmation. There is simply no wiggle room in that language that gives Cordray any authority, as litigation will soon make plain.

So what is this? It’s politics — Chicago politics, plain and simple. If any doubt remained, three years into his presidency, that Obama is a master demagogue, with class warfare as his central tool, this incident should dispel it.

Comment Policy

Click the green box to read the National Right To Work Committee Comment Policy

12 Responses to Obama NLRB Actions “Unconstitutional”

  1. [...] in regards to CFPB, but has appointed three new members to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) without Senate approval  at the same time.  Obama wants to unionize all of the work force.  If [...]

  2. Michael McOsker says:

    Matt,
    I don’t see how anybody could get “to the right of” Stalin. He was about as right wing as they come.
    -Michael
    PS: A real man would NEVER refer to a woman as “bitch”. Only sissies talk that way.

  3. Car Accident Attorney Lynnwood | Wakefield and Associates says:

    [...] and Obama uses recess appointments to install unconfirmable nominees. Legal? [Roger Pilon via National Right To Work, Richard Epstein, Mark Calabria]. What the New York Times thought back then about recess [...]

  4. Motorcycle Accident Lawyer Seattle | Wakefield and Associates says:

    [...] and Obama uses recess appointments to install unconfirmable nominees. Legal? [Roger Pilon via National Right To Work, Richard Epstein, Mark Calabria]. What the New York Times thought back then about recess [...]

  5. Stella says:

    Am I wrong to gather that recess appointments are to fill VACANCIES, not out right new appointments. The position wasn’t actually established so where is there a vacancy. Just wondering

  6. Matt says:

    OH. Mikey spare me your insincere tisk-tisking you pathetic union tool. And douchecbag is perfectly acceptable as we know one when we see one.

    But I am sorry about that Obama comment, I didn’t realize anything to the right of Joespf Stalin is too conservative for you. I figured given his arrogant and elitist attitude, his inability to accept criticism from his opponents and his self-serving demeanor (along with his ugly, greedy bitch of a wife) that he was truly ideal president. I mean after all he is doing anything he can to reward your fellow jobs-killing Marxist Union cronies.

  7. Clark Jensen says:

    Very well said.

    Probably my biggest concern about Obama is the fact that he seems to be getting desperate and is obviously unconcerned about Constitution limitations on his power. Without checks on power, our nation soon becomes a dictatorship. I fear that is where we are heading as we ignore the Constitution wholesale.

  8. Michael McOsker says:

    Matt (Mattie?),
    Are you that fellow from last week? It looks like they pulled down some of your more potty-mouthed postings from that period. Maybe “douchebag” will be OK with these folks.
    -Michael.
    PS: I’m not particularly fond of the President’s politics. They’re a little to right wing for me. He does seem to be quite a decent guy, though.

  9. Matt says:

    Mikey if anyone is whining its leftist douchebags like yourself and the affirmative-action poster boy-king of whom you worship cult-of-personality style.

  10. Michael McOsker says:

    Looks to me that America’s President has more backbone than Rehnquist’s President had. Quit whining.

  11. [...] and Obama uses recess appointments to install unconfirmable nominees. Legal? [Roger Pilon via National Right To Work, Richard Epstein, Mark Calabria. What the New York Times thinks about recess appointments (at [...]

  12. [...] constitutional scholars beg to differ. In one report by the National Right To Work Committee, (http://nrtwc.org/obama-nlrb-actions-unconstitutional/) Professors John Yoo and Richard Epstein, writing separately, both concluded that, under Article [...]