Ïîïóëÿðíûå ñîîáùåíèÿ

понедельник

The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Monday in a big constitutional fight over the balance of power between the president and the Senate.

At issue is whether the president's power to make temporary appointments during the Senate recess can be curtailed by the use of pro forma Senate sessions during which no business is conducted.

During the holidays from mid-December 2011 to Jan. 20, 2012, the Senate did not meet as it usually does. Failing to get the Republican House to grant permission to recess, the Senate formally convened and adjourned multiple times. Indeed, each time the Senate adjourned, it stipulated that no business would be conducted when it reconvened three days later.

A typical pro forma session on Jan. 6, 2012, opened with a Senate clerk reading aloud a letter from the Senate's senior member appointing another senator, James Webb from nearby Virginia, to chair the day's business. Webb then immediately adjourned the Senate session.

That session lasted all of 30 inconsequential seconds. Pretty much the norm for that period. But the legality of those brief sessions is the heart of the dispute before the Supreme Court now.

The president contends that these sessions were, in essence, fakes — a legal pretense — when in fact the Senate was really in recess.

It was during one of these pro forma sessions that President Obama nominated three people to fill long-vacant seats on the National Labor Relations Board. The nominees would serve until the end of the following year or longer if confirmed.

Part of the reason Obama used the recess appointment mechanism was that Senate Republicans had dragged their feet on so many appointments that the board, charged with enforcing labor laws, did not have a quorum to do its job, and the Supreme Court in 2010 had said the board could not act without a quorum.

Once the recess appointees began their work hearing labor cases, a soda pop bottling company named Noel Canning challenged an adverse ruling, contending that the board's members were unconstitutionally appointed.

Noel Canning won in the U.S. Court of Appeals based in Washington, D.C. Now the company, backed by 44 Republican senators, is asking the Supreme Court to affirm its lower court win. The company will argue that the Senate makes its own rules, the Senate was not in recess at the time of the appointments, and that, therefore, the president had no power to make the recess appointments.

Article II of the Constitution states: "The President shall have the power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate," and that the appointment shall automatically expire at the end of the next year if the nominee is not confirmed.

Texas A&M professor George Edwards points out that, at the time the Constitution was written, the only transportation available was by horse and carriage, not planes, trains or automobiles.

"There would be substantial periods when the Senate was not there to advise and consent on a presidential nomination," Edwards says. "The Founding Fathers didn't want there to be gaps in the administration of policy, so they provided for recess appointments."

Today, in contrast, senators can get to Washington quickly. The nature of government, however, is also dramatically different.

Edwards notes that the founders could not have conceived of government of the scale that we have today. "The government is much larger now. There are many more people in appointed positions and so many more vacancies that occur," he says.

Edwards says that since the mid-1800s, there have been more than 600 recess appointments to civilian jobs, and hundreds, perhaps thousands more in the military. Even some Supreme Court justices were first recess-appointed. Chief Justice Earl Warren was recess-appointed after the sitting chief justice died in September 1953. Warren served in that capacity for six months before he was confirmed by the Senate in March 1954.

In modern times, three appeals courts have upheld the president's power to make midsession recess appointments. In this case, however, the Court of Appeals reached a contrary conclusion, siding with the Noel Canning company.

Noel Francisco, the company's lawyer, contends that the importance of these appointments proves his point: "That's precisely why the recess appointments power was meant to be a narrow emergency power."

White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler disagrees. In an interview with NPR, she said that the way Senate Republicans managed to keep the Senate in session without actually handling any formal business proves her point — that the Senate sessions were nothing more than a "legal fiction."

"[The Senate] was not conducting any business and did not intend to conduct any business during these pro forma sessions," Ruemmler said. "It was solely employed, and members of the Senate have been quite clear about that, for the purpose of preventing the president from making recess appointments.

"It is not a bypass of the Senate confirmation process," she added. "It is a way for the president ... by express authority in the Constitution, to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed." That is something that she maintains cannot be done if many top federal agency positions are allowed to remain unfilled.

Ruemmler contends that if Senate Republicans prevail here, the recess appointment power will likely be dead for all practical purposes. The Senate, after all, could eat up every recess with pro forma sessions to prevent presidential appointments.

Noel Francisco readily concedes this point. "The fact of the matter is that in today's day and age, the Senate is virtually never incapable of providing advice and consent given modern transportation and communications," he says. "So, yes, the Senate can render itself perpetually available to provide advice and consent, and if it does so, the president is not empowered to make a recess appointment."

Related NPR Stories

Law

Supreme Court Bolsters Prosecutors' Use Of Psychiatric Exam

As Israelis paid their respects Monday to former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with a memorial service and funeral, one of his contemporaries on the world stage offered this view of the general and statesman who an iconic and controversial figures:

"The idea that he changed from man of war to a man of peace," is mistaken, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said during a memorial service at the Knesset, Israel's legislature.

воскресенье

Shut out all night at the Golden Globes, the historical drama 12 Years a Slave eked out the night's top honor, best film drama, while the con-artist caper American Hustle landed a leading three awards, including best film comedy.

David O. Russell's American Hustle had the better night overall, winning acting awards for Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence. Best picture was the only award for 12 Years a Slave, which came in with seven nominations, tied for the most with American Hustle.

Awards were otherwise spread around.

Matthew McConaughey took best actor in a drama for his performance in the Texas HIV drama Dallas Buyers Club. Leonardo DiCaprio, a nine-time Golden Globe nominee, won his second Globe for best actor in a comedy for his work in The Wolf of Wall Street.

Alfonso Cuaron won best director for the space odyssey Gravity, a worldwide hit and critical favorite.

The night's biggest winners may have been hosts Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, whose second time hosting the Hollywood Foreign Press Association's Beverly Hills, Calif., ceremony was just as successful as last year's show. Fey concluded the night by toasting the awards as "the beautiful mess we hoped it would be."

суббота

Everyone loves hugs right? Well, no. And for those who aren't fans, things can get really awkward.

In a recent piece for TIME.com, research psychologist Peggy Drexler declared: "I am not a hugger. And I am not alone."

She calls for an end to the "hugging arms race," particularly at work.

"It's something that's in the zeitgeist, but we really haven't made any rules," she tells All Things Considered host Arun Rath. "My own rule is: I won't hug if you don't."

Drexler became acutely aware of her dislike for professional hugs after earning her Ph.D.

"I was feeling very professional and I saw a well-loved professor on the street and she was coming towards me," she recalls. "All of the sudden, I knew she was going in for the hug. It struck me, 'I don't want this, but how do I get out of it without being hurtful or graceless?' "

She thinks there are some occasions where hugging at work is acceptable: after a big win, a personal loss, or a big life event — like an engagement or wedding. In general, she says, "hug sparingly."

"If it's someone you see in your everyday life, you can become known as a serial hugger, and it's a bit creepy."

If hugging comes up, particularly at the office, here are Drexler's tips to help non-huggers break free:

Keep something between you and the hugger until the moment passes.

Be direct and say, "Sorry, I'm not a hugger."

Take physical control with a stiff handshake and firm elbow that keeps personal space intact.

Escape and find something that needs your personal attention.

If nothing comes to mind, drop your cellphone.

As a blanket rule, Drexler says, "If you wonder if a hug is appropriate, it probably isn't."

Blog Archive