101
Exactly what he's doing is pushing for them to protect the scumbags he intends to appoint from the scrutiny that's sure to expose just how scummy they are.
On June 26, 2014, in a 9–0 ruling, the United States Supreme Court validated this practice of using pro forma sessions to block the president from using the recess appointment authority
Can’t do recess appointments if the senate is never in recess. When was the last recess appointment made? 2012, and it was ruled invalid.
This makes no sense anyway. The Senate will be Republican-controlled by four votes before he takes office. So he’s worried about Republicans blocking his nominees? Or is he asking for an ally that’ll put the Senate into recess immediately so he can recess appoint hundreds of people? I doubt even his staunchest allies will be willing to publicly neuter themselves so much.
He doesn't want Democrats grilling his candidates.
Exactly.
2 reasons, I would presume.
-
He doesn't want his appointees to have to deal with the questions that come up during the confirmation process, and
-
This way he can appoint the worst of the worst without worrying about Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins persuading 1 or 2 others to defect.
Rules and laws laws being followed? Precedent being respected? Court orders being abided by?
Oh, bless your heart.
this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
101 points (99.0% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3323 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS