Observers expect that the ruling in NLRB v. Canning will decide whether the Supreme Court will facilitate the growth of an all-powerful executive who may assign his own definitions to key constitutional concepts or whether they will force the president to adhere to the limits set on his power by the founders.
The Supreme Court has decided to allow 45 Republican senators 15 minutes to make their case against the Obama administration’s recess appointments during oral arguments in the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) case.
When the high court takes up the case of NLRB v. Canning, justices will listen to the group explain why they believe appointments to the NLRB made by President Obama were unconstitutional.
Experts are describing Canning as a critical case in defining the constitutional separation of powers among the three branches of the federal government.
“The case is already elevated as the greatest separation of powers case in 100 years, but hearing from actual senators adds to the clash between the Senate and the ‘Constitutional Law Professor’-in-chief regarding who gets to define whether a Senate session is valid,” said Glenn Taubman, a lawyer with the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, as quoted December 11 in the Washington Free Beacon.
[…]
