01.09.2012 in Big Government, Consitution, Politics by Rick Manning 15

Obama’s extraconstitutional NLRB appointments

NRD Editor’s Note: This post originally appeared at The Hill.

By Rick Manning — Washington, D.C., political insiders, wonks and talk radio are all atwitter about the decision by President Obama to blow up the Senate advise-and-consent process by making appointments of three individuals to the National Labor Relations Board and one to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The three NLRB appointees will allow the board to continue on with a quorum making broad sweeping regulatory rulings that threaten to transform employment law by executive fiat during this last year of the Obama administration.

The illegitimacy of the NLRB quorum will guarantee that every decision they make will end up in federal court on appeal, which is where these decisions should be made in the first place.

This glimmer of good news out of the Obama-created constitutional crisis reinforces the need for Congress to codify it into law by passing legislation by Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) that would take away the NLRB’s adjudicatory authority no matter who sits on the board.

The Scott bill would take the NLRB middleman out of the legal process, allowing the board to issue advisory opinions like the EEOC does, but those opinions would carry no legal weight.

Allowing employment-law disputes to head directly to the federal judiciary will cut out the politically motivated appointees who apparently don’t even need to have Senate consent from making law.

If Congress wants to do something to protect its constitutional prerogatives beyond filing a lawsuit, it should take up Scott’s Protecting American Jobs Act — H.R.2978 — and forever remove the temptation to stack this formerly independent board to benefit a political constituency heading into an election.

The mess that is going to be created when all of the rulings by this new board are overturned because they lacked a quorum under the Supreme Court’s New Process Steel v. NLRB decision can be avoided by passing this common-sense proposal.

Congress needs to go Nike on this one, and Just Do It.

Rick Manning is the communications director of Americans for Limited Government and a former public affairs chief of staff at the U.S. Department of Labor.

This article has 15 comments
  • Leonard W Giddens Jr 09.01.2012 1:47 PM

    How about a law to band any low life that has any ties to the mob union now or in the pass. There can be no better safe guard.

  • Shortstu 09.01.2012 2:27 PM

    Labor would be better off without a Board than to have these appointees.

  • Anonymous 09.01.2012 3:28 PM

    This is just another way that Obama has to pay the unions
    back for their support.  Really the NLRB,
    his EPA, his Environmental Board, Obamacare, Fannie Mae, and Freddy Mac grants
    for student loans, all his stimulus programs, all need to be done away with.  Never in the history of our country has any
    President wasted more tax payer’s money, borrowed more money from foreign
    countries, and raised the debt limit as much as Obama has in just three years
    of his four year term.  Time for change
    and some hope.

  • Jwatersphd 09.01.2012 3:56 PM

    Well, Rick. You are to be commended for being perhaps the first person, at least on the right wing,  to stop blaming Obama for this, which was created by yr right wingers who flatly said they weren’t going to appoint anyone (to either of the two agencies) unless they were emasculated – which is NOT how the law works – is it? I suppose you would take the same approach to the consumer protection agency, which is to say, if congress doesn’t like the law it passed, it can change the law. What it can’t do, legitimately, is to refuse to appoint someone, as an “activist” way (just like they gripe about judges doing) to make new law. Yes, we are talking about “legitimately,” because I’m sure you know that Obama’s actions are “unconstitutional” in your words, which will be up to the courts to decide, but as far as “legitimacy” – whether it was the right thing to do or not – is simply a matter of “political” opinion. You probably don’t like either law, but don’t insult our intelligence by calling Obama’s actions wrong when he’s merely responding to illegitimate behavior on the part of your Tea Party friends. No one doubted that the Consumer Protection nominee Cordray was qualified – which is what they’re supposed to “advise and consent” to. But they took it to pervert the process to change the law, which, by the way, is not something that can just be done on the spot. So you’re right twice. Now how about stopping the hysterics about Obama? You don’t increase your credibility by displaying your obvious bias.

  • Jim W 09.01.2012 4:08 PM

    Unfortunatly this means nothing if no body will do anything about Mr. Obama’s unconstitutional activities. We have a weak coorupt congress and a president who is ineligible and unwill to follow the constitution.

  • Anonymous 09.01.2012 6:31 PM

    The only way that history will describe this president is to call him ” traitor and crime boss ” .

  • Jwatersphd 09.01.2012 8:44 PM

    Wow, you sure must know a lot about the future. But I think you’re leaving a lot out.
    If you read these pages very often, you’ll know they’ll also call him a socialist, a communist, a Muslim terrorist, a foreigner . . . Oh, the other day I read “mulatto.”
    You can’t say he’s “drank the Kook aid,” though, can you? He just wants us to do that. 
    We can’t forget all these things. We have to be sure we get all the name calling in that we can! Feels so good! 

  • Anonymous 09.01.2012 9:00 PM

    I base all my claims on what he has accomplished so far , he is a fascist leading us into socialism , I won’t mention any names but I think there has already been such a leader in the past , in another country of course . 

  • Jwatersphd 09.01.2012 9:22 PM

    Yes, that’s good! A fascist and a socialist. I forgot the fascist part. I bet if we wait a few minutes, we can see more hatred. Oh! I see down below, “a president who is ineligible and ‘unwill’ to follow the constitution,” and a ‘coorupt’ Congress. Pretty quick someone’s going to come on here and tell us to take our head out of where the sun don’t shine. But we can rise above that.

  • Jwatersphd 09.01.2012 9:25 PM

    Yes, they band birds and it has safeguarded us against birds for many years. I would like to band those who have any ties to the union mob, as well the mob union. Have you got a line on a good supplier of bands? And I DON’T mean “band aids,” either. It’s time to stop playing softball. 

  • Anonymous 09.01.2012 9:27 PM

    The legal definition of a person with their head up their ass is “democrat ” or as coloquely known a ” demon rat . “

  • Dean 09.01.2012 11:10 PM

    Why doesn’t congress just defund the NLRB and the same goes for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  Come on, you pansies, GET ER DONE!

Back to top

Copyright © 2008-2014 NetRight Daily