The Rule of Law Still Lives

It was refreshing, indeed, last week when the U.S. Supreme Court made clear that the law can still trump politics.

The phrase “a nation of laws” has been the mantra of constitutional government since our country’s founding.  But, alas, it’s often seemed to be an ideal only occasionally reached.  How else to explain the numerous high court splits of 5-4 along seemingly partisan lines with GOP-nominated justices on one side and Democratic Administration selections on the other?

But last week’s case on President Obama’s use of recess appointments was different.  The Administration’s actions were unconstitutional, the Court ruled 9-0.

Under Article 2, section 2, of the U.S. Constitution, “The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate…”

In 2012-2013, the President made appointments to the National Labor Relations Board which he claimed were made during Senate “recesses”.  Not coincidentally, those appointments had failed to win confirmation previously.  The Senate, however, did not consider itself to be in recess when the disputed selections to the NLRB were made.

The Court decided in a substantial nod to the Constitutional doctrine of separation of powers that the Senate, not the President, decides when it is recess.   Thus, the Justices agreed that Obama had no right to do what he did. 

To non-lawyers, these may seem like technical matters of little concern.  But, in reality, they are momentous. 

In our government, the Executive’s authority is not unrestrained.  The Court’s decision is a reminder that the Constitution continues to provide limitations on the President’s authority even if partisan advantage suffers as a result. 

The Court’s four liberal members are to be commended, at least in this case, for doing their duty.  They make America proud.