On Monday, January 13, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in an important separation-of-powers case concerning the president’s recess appointments power. Under the Constitution the president may “fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate” without going through the normal requirements of obtaining the “advice and consent” of the Senate. On January 4, 2012, when the Senate was arguably not in recess, President Obama appointed three members to fill vacant seats on the National Labor Relations Board. Noel Canning, a business adversely affected by a subsequent NLRB decision, then challenged the constitutionality of the appointments in the D.C. Circuit. The three-judge panel found that the president had exceeded his authority, as have two other appellate courts since then in separate suits. Please join us for what should be a spirited debate about the meaning and history of the recess appointments power.
Featuring Holly Bell, Associate Professor (Business), University of Alaska Anchorage; and Hester Peirce, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center; moderated by Louise C. Bennetts, Associate Director, Financial Regulation Studies, Cato Institute.
- Legal Briefs
- Cato Handbook for Policymakers
- Cato Journal
- Cato's Letter
- Cato's Letters
- Cato Papers on Public Policy
- Cato Policy Report
- Cato State Legislative Guide
- Cracking the Books
- Economic Freedom of the States of India
- Economic Freedom of the World
- Public Comments
- Supreme Court Review
In this issue of Regulation, Jonathan H. Adler and Nathaniel Stewart make the case for property-based fishery management, utilizing territorial or catch-share allocation among fishery participants. Also in this issue, Michael L. Wachter explores the relationship between the much-maligned National Labor Relations Act and the decline in union membership.
Latest Blog Post
The Supreme Court correctly decides to uphold a Michigan constitutional amendment that outlaws racial preferences in higher education.
Timothy Sandefur’s insightful new book documents a vital, forgotten truth: our Constitution was written to secure liberty, not to empower democracy.