Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bdhess 3479 days ago
It's hard to reconcile your logic with Hamilton's from Federalist #67:

The ordinary power of appointment is confined to the President and Senate JOINTLY, and can therefore only be exercised during the session of the Senate; but as it would have been improper to oblige this body to be continually in session for the appointment of officers and as vacancies might happen IN THEIR RECESS, which it might be necessary for the public service to fill without delay, the succeeding clause is evidently intended to authorize the President, SINGLY, to make temporary appointments "during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session."

Given the joint nature of appointments, and that the legislature is a co-equal branch of government, it seems reasonable that if the Senate would prefer to remain permanently in session so as not to diminish its authority, it's within its right to do so. And that an executive trying to make a recess appointment in this case is exactly the sort of "regard[ing] rules as an obstruction to be got around" that you seem to be railing against.

2 comments

I disagree, but I applaud the high quality of your argument.

it seems reasonable that if the Senate would prefer to remain permanently in session so as not to diminish its authority, it's within its right to do so

Legally yes, politically no. There's no quorum so it's not possible to transact any legislative business and everyone knows this. That gap between the procedural state and reality delegitimizes the procedure through its self-evident falsity.

If the public perceives the government to be a sham, why keep obeying it? I suggest to you that the emergent political reality is that the constitution is becoming a dead letter and that the Declaration of Independence more closely mirrors national sentiment.

But that gets back to my original point about cell phones and airplanes. If the modern age, if there were an item that Senate leadership deemed sufficiently important, they could call the Senate back from non-recess recess and get their quorum in a matter of days.

Edit: it's also worth noting that serving in the Senate was originally a part-time occupation; recesses of several months were common until the 1930s. That's a very different case than in 2016, where the longest break was five weeks.

If they were actually in session it would be fine. It's faking it that's awful.

A recess appointment seems fair here to me. It's not the rules that the president would be working around, it's a failure of congress to act.

Both sides are supposed to have power here. Ideally if either side refuses to do their job for long enough, the other one should be able to install a temporary appointee.