i hope he does more of this in the future. it's far past time he take bold action to stand up to the republican wackos.

Only lots and lots of Democratic voters showing up at the polls to vote in November can end the pro forma idiocy

Obama is the head of the executive branch and the Justice Dept is part of the executive branch so of course they are going to say that it was legal and above board.

HuffPost.

Kudos to President Obama and may this fighting streak remain throughout his second term as well.

unless of course . . .

And tens of thousands more were tortured, murdered, and dumped in the streets of Baghdad, to the bafflement of US and Iraqi authorities, and Dick Cheney's trucking company, which had cornered the market on shipping there....

So those folks can take that shoe off the other foot and place it firmly up their arses.

Bring on the challenges! It's time to resolve this issue once and for all.

The same Justice Dept that works for President Obama? Well, I'm shocked that they approved their boss's action.

This approval will, of course, discourage the Republicans from challenging in court. Or not.

These recess appointments are also approved by me, JustABozoOnThisBus, and that opinion will carry equal weight with the Republicans.

I have a feeling the Republican challenges will wind up at the Supreme Court. Just a guess.

that they would make a big stink about the appointments as soon as they come back from recess.

However, I don't expect anything to come of this. I think that it is basically over, except for some more Repub obstruction.

Considering the fact that they refuse to issue a ruling as to which branch of government has the power to make war. They call it the "political question doctrine".

Just saying. It's not hard to get the justice department to say that the justice department, and other executive branch entities, are empowered to be powerful.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

Com'on, Speaker Boehner, come out from under your desk now, and quit sucking your thumb. I'm sure that the fetal position is not a good position for a man of your stature to take at a time like this. Com'on, com'on, quit crying. Mr. Speaker, please, you're slobbering now. Wipe your nose. Please, please John, quit crying. Com'on, take your thumb out, almost out, com'on, a little more, a little more. Good. No, now don't start crying again. Come here, come here. Momma's gonna buy you a mockingbird, and if that mockingbird don't sing, momma's gonna buy you a lobbyist's ring. And if that lobbyist's ring don't shine, then momma's gonna buy you a banking job. Now, now don't you feel better? Com'on, look at me, quit sniveling, it's gonna be all right. Cheer up, remember that new golf club you wanted for Christmas, but you didn't get it? Yeah, that one. Well, we'll just go down to the store tonight and we'll just buy that golf club. Does that sound like a good idea to you? Huh? No, no more balls. You lost the ones you had last year. No, now, don't start up again. Huh? No, it's gonna be a long time until then, Johnny. It's still 10 months away. No, I don't think I'm going to let you talk to Sean tonight. It's not a good idea to go on tv tonight. Not until you can get the red out of your eyes. Your eyes are all puffy now and everyone will know you've been crying. Maybe tomorrow. Yes, I promise. Now, all better? Good, now go back to your coloring book and try to stay in the lines this time, okay? Okay. Now, I'll go make you a warm cup of hot chocolate and cut up a Zinger for you, just the way you like it, in little bitty, bite-size pieces, so you won't choke again. Okay? Okay. Now, I'm going to be right in the other room, so if you get scared again, you just call out. Okay? Okay then. But don't hide under the desk any more. Okay? Okay, I'll be right back.

Very nicely done, yes indeed.

Congress is either in session for real or out of session. Pro forma is not in the Constitution and does not count.

And "The Democrats did it too" is not a valid line of argument.

I'm of the opinion that the recess appointments were legit, but getting some toady in the justice department to agree with something a president does has been a joke ever since Bush II had such psychos ok things like domestic spying and torture.

good that should put an end to that

Too bad Obama's "unconstitutional" move turns out to be COMPLETELY constitutional.

Lots of fireworks and shiny objects galore!

From now on, if this sticks, no president will be prevented from making whatever recess appointments that he or she wishes. A future Democratic congress will be unable to prevent a Republican president from declaring them in recess and making appointments. Although I like these particular appointments, I am uneasy about the precedent that is being set.

so you mean after that second 9/11 style terrorist attack that kills 5,000 Americans, that prompted the creation of the hold Americans without trial agency that the Repubs have been dying for, and when the Repub president puts someone into office to run that agency there is nothing a democratic congress in recess can do about it. ouch so they can appoint an agency to take our due process and get someone to head it without us being able to stop it.

Seriously its congress saying we made this bureau so we can get votes not so that it will have a function and do something to the tune of what it needs to be doing. Some of the Anti-Obama rhetoric is that he isn't doing anything (believe me i live in a RED state i deal with that rhetoric on a daily basis) if Obama isn't doing anything then obviously he is a bad president forget the fact that republicans are doing everything in their power to keep him from doing all he could, and how dare he try and get something accomplished. the Repubs are hoping that if Obama fails they will get their chance to shine, lets prove to them that it will not fly. Also A warning to our democratic congressmen, the Repubs only voted for the consumer financial protection bureau so they could get votes, don't fall into that trap we might not forgive the individual congressmen who vote for creating an agency to satisfy voters, that will cost us later.

well done!

A preview of what they will say: "Oh, Obama's justice department approves Obama's actions. Big surprise." Still, I don't see them being able to do much. Constitutionally and by precedent, Obama is in the clear. They're just butthurt that Obama finally stood up to their bullying.

I believe that it was appropriate for the President to make recess appointments. However, I'm not convinced that the approach taken by DOJ to defend the appointments is necessarily the strongest. The DOJ opinion focuses on two questions: can recess appointments be made during intrasession (as opposed to intersession) adjournments of more than a few days length and can pro forma sessions be used to shorten the duration of an intrasession recess into segments too brief to allow recess appointments.

The question of whether recess appointments can be made during an "intrasession" recess is a relatively easy one to answer: there is a long history of such appointments. However, while DOJ notes that there is no definitive answer to the issue of whether a recess of only a few days can support the exercise of a recess appointment, it doesn't answer that question and instead focuses on its conclusion that the recess in this case was sufficiently long because the pro forma sessions don't effectively break it up for purposes of the recess clause.

My concern is that DOJ has more or less glossed over the seeming conflict between its determination that the recess in this instance runs for more than 20 days because the pro forma sessions don't effectively break it up and the requirement under the Constitution that neither House adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other body. DOJ acknowledges this provision and also the fact that there is no concurrent resolution by the two houses relating to the adjournment as there typically is when the adjournment is for a period of more than three days. But it doesn't offer a compelling argument as to how the recess of the Senate can be considered a recess of 20 days but not require House consent. My fear is that a court might conclude that either the Senate recess is unconstitutional or its less than three days and that, in either instance, exercise of the recess appointment power was not appropriate.

I think there are answers to this conundrum, including the argument that it doesn't matter because even a short recess can support the exercise of the recess power or that even if the Senate recess was unconstitutional, it was still a recess for purposes of the recess appointment clause. While the DOJ memo hints obliquely at these arguments, it really doesn't take the issue on squarely.

Effing obstructionist stupid ass congress. Suck it, bitchards.

In fact, DOJ itself expressly acknowledges that the issues on which it is opining regarding the President's recess appointments are "novel" and that "the substantial arguments on each side create some litigation risk for such appointments."

While I believe that the President's exercise of the recess appointment power should be and will be upheld if challenged, no one should assume (and DOJ certainly hasn't) that its a slam dunk.

Now they can eat crap pies.