ABOUT THIS BLOG

I shall post videos, graphs, news stories, and other material there. We shall use some of this material in class, and you may review the rest at your convenience. You will all receive invitations to post to the blog. (Please let me know if you do not get such an invitation.) I encourage you to use the blog in these ways:
To post questions or comments about the readings before we discuss them in class;
To follow up on class discussions with additional comments or questions.
To post relevant news items or videos.

There are only two major limitations: no coarse language, and no derogatory comments about people at the Claremont Colleges.


Search This Blog

Thursday, April 16, 2020

Can POTUS Adjourn Congress?

The Senate’s practice of gaveling into so-called pro forma sessions, where no one is even there, has prevented me from using the constitutional authority that were given under the Recess Provisions. The Senate should either fulfill its duty and vote on my nominees, or it should formally adjourn so that I can make recess appointments. We have a tremendous number of people that have to come into government, and now more so than ever before because of the virus and the problem. We have to do it, and we have to do whatever we have to do. They’ve made it very, very difficult to run government. I don’t think any Administration has done anywhere near what we’ve done in three and a half years, but every week they put up roadblocks, whether it’s Russia, Russia, Russia, or whether it’s impeachment hoax or whatever it may be. It’s always roadblocks and a waste of time. If the House will not agree to that adjournment, I will exercise my constitutional authority to adjourn both Chambers of Congress. The current practice of leaving town while conducting phony, proforma sessions is a dereliction of duty that the American people cannot afford during this crisis. It is a scam. What they do. It’s a scam and everybody knows it, and it’s been that way for a long time, and perhaps it’s never done before. It’s never been done before.
The "constitutional authority" is Article II, sec. 3:
 He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Anna Palmer and Jake Sherman at Politico:
WONK ALERT! … SURE, TRUMP CAN try to adjourn the Senate to get more nominees through, but it would be exceedingly hard. TO UNDERSTAND the absolute absurdity of TRUMP’S argument, here’s what would have to happen: Senate Majority Leader MITCH MCCONNELL would have to bring the Senate back, and they’d have to vote to adjourn. Speaker NANCY PELOSI would then have to bring the House back, and the House would have to amend the Senate’s adjournment resolution -- essentially voting against it. Then the Senate would have to disagree to the House’s amendment. ONLY THEN can TRUMP adjourn Congress, according to experts.
-- BUT THE ODDS OF THAT are so infinitesimal they are hardly calculable. PELOSI can essentially ignore the resolution from the Senate, starving TRUMP of the disagreement he needs to adjourn unilaterally. Ah, you say, it’s privileged, and thereby gets immediate consideration? Nah. PELOSI can turn off the privilege in a rule with a simple majority vote and then she doesn’t have to touch it. No disagreement, no adjournment from TRUMP.
-- EVEN MORE REMOTE: IF TRUMP were to somehow force adjournment, clause 12(c) of Rule I of the House Rules -- added after 9/11 -- allows PELOSI to bring the House back immediately after TRUMP adjourns. Like seconds after it happens. He would never have any time to recess appoint anyone. (N.B.: Most of these processes has never been tested, so courts would probably have thoughts about this whole process.)
ALSO, TRUMP doesn’t have a whole lot to complain about when it comes to nominees. He has remade the judiciary with 193 new judges (h/t SEUNG MIN KIM). Eighty-two executive branch nominations are pending, according to the Partnership for Public Service’s Political Appointee Tracker. Many are stuck in committee, which, as CARL HULSE of the NYT points out, means that Republicans probably have issues with them, not Democrats.

No comments:

Blog Archive