{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://web.archive.org/web/20140223033708/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-senate-republicans-file-supreme-court-amicus-brief-president%E2%80%99s", "Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on President\u2019s Unconstitutional \u201cRecess\u201d Appointments", "2013-11-26", "2013", "2013-11", "Republican", "House", "SC", "Tim Scott", "S001184", "web.archive.org", null, null, "legacy", "Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on President\u2019s Unconstitutional \u201cRecess\u201d Appointments \n\u2018Last year, the President made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even trying to obtain its advice and consent,\u2019 Sen. McConnell said. \u2018The President was dismissive of the Constitution\u2019s constraints on his power, saying he would \u201crefuse to take no for an answer.\u201d Three federal appeals courts have rejected this and similar abuses of power.\u00a0 They have reaffirmed what Republicans and job creators around the country have been saying: the President\u2019s attempt to circumvent the Senate with supposed \u201crecess appointments\u201d to the NLRB was unconstitutional. It will now be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the President\u2019s recess appointments violated the Constitution, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and two other federal appeals courts have found.\u2019\nRead the full amicus brief here.\u00a0\nContact: (202) 224-2718\nWASHINGTON, D.C. \u2013\u00a0U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) announced today that he and 44 of his Senate colleagues filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court in a challenge (NLRB v.Noel Canning) to the constitutionality of President Obama\u2019s so-called \u201crecess\u201d appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in January 2012.\nEarlier this year a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously ruled that the President\u2019s so-called 2012 \u201crecess\u201d appointments to the NLRB are invalid, and the Supreme Court is hearing the Administration\u2019s appeal of that decision. The Supreme Court argument has been scheduled for January 13, 2014.\nAs they contended in an earlier amicus brief in the D.C. Circuit, the 45 senators argue in their brief that by declaring the Senate to be in a continual period of recess when it had determined to be in session regularly, the President usurped the Senate\u2019s authority to determine the rules of its own proceedings. By purporting to \u201crecess appoint\u201d political allies to the NLRB without the Senate\u2019s advice and consent, the senators argue, the President took away the Senate\u2019s right and responsibility to review executive nominations\u2014claiming to himself the unilateral appointment power that the Framers deliberately withheld from the Office of the Presidency.\n\u201cLast year, the President made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even trying to obtain its advice and consent,\u201d Sen. McConnell said. \u201cThe President was dismissive of the Constitution\u2019s constraints on his power, saying he would \u2018refuse to take no for an answer.\u2019\u00a0 Three federal appeals courts have rejected this and similar abuses of power.\u00a0 They have reaffirmed what Republicans and job creators around the country have been saying: the President\u2019s attempt to circumvent the Senate with supposed \u2018recess appointments\u2019 to the NLRB was unconstitutional. It will now be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the President\u2019s recess appointments violated the Constitution, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and two other federal appeals courts have found.\u201d\nThe challenge to the recess appointments\u00a0is being brought by Noel Canning, a local, family-owned business in Washington State that bottles and distributes soft drinks.\u00a0The company is challenging the NLRB\u2019s determination that it must enter into a collective bargaining agreement with a labor union.\nIn its January 2013 ruling, the D.C. Circuit Court said, \u201cAllowing the President to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution\u2019s separation of powers.\u201d The Court determined that: \u201cAn interpretation of \u2018the Recess\u2019 that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement, giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law.\u201d\nSenate Republicans retained former Assistant to the Solicitor General Miguel Estrada to file the amicus brief in the Supreme Court as he did in the D.C. Circuit in this case. Mr. Estrada is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and serves as Co-Chair of the firm's Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group.\n\u00a0\n####", 1, "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z", "2026-03-30T12:14:52Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://web.archive.org/web/20140223033708/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-senate-republicans-file-supreme-court-amicus-brief-president%E2%80%99s"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.5928270295262337, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}