“buh when did trump ever follow the rules”
it’s not about following the rules, dipshits, it’s about whether the words carry any legal authority. there is no button he can press to make congress adjourn. congress would have to choose to do it. and that is a distinction that matters.
it’s not about following the rules, dipshits, it’s about whether the words carry any legal authority. there is no button he can press to make congress adjourn. congress would have to choose to do it. and that is a distinction that matters.
Reposted from
jamelle
sorry but article ii section 3 does not say that the president can force congress to adjourn *when it does not want to* and spreading that message is doing trump’s work for him
Comments
Idk about Thune, but it sure seems like Mike Johnson will do exactly as he's told.
And the truth of what “adjourned” means ends up decided by… a judge? The folks who report to the unconfirmed Cabinet secretaries?
But then some appointed & non-confirmed cabinet secretary is going to be in charge of some sort of enforcement action that then gets challenged in court. And I think SCOTUS will feel forced to weigh in then.
Too much catastrophizing going around.
There's enough real shit to worry about.
Also, people need to learn what they can and should do to try to help our way out of this shitty situation.
https://washcodems.org/2023/01/24/connect-to-your-legislators/
(Or what others may call a dictatorship.)
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/DatesofSessionsofCongress.htm
(hearings can be held on nomines, tho)
You said that the "when they can't agree on when to adjourn" bit applies only to the extraordinary sessions the President calls, when in fact those two clauses are not linked at all.
But more importantly, that's what *Jamelle* is saying, and it's not what you said lol
Congress: no we’re not
Now what? He sends in the army? He needs these guys to pass a budget or federal paychecks are going to start bouncing sometime next year
Or more importantly, does he know and understand that?
BTW, have you heard the term chose agent before?
Trump won't need an army for this takeover. He will do it legally, and eventually people will just give him what he wants because fighting is pointless.
reading that clause as referring to any session OTHER than one called by a President renders too much of the rest of the Constitution pointless.
picture this:
1. Trump says: congress is adjourned
2. Congress: does not adjourn
there is no court action to take from this point, no lawsuit, nothing, no scotus, it’s over, end of the attempt to adjourn, that’s it
These people, such as Gaetz, will give orders that are ultra vires without Senate confirmation. The controversy/crisis all takes place outside the capitol building.
https://bsky.app/profile/hoobajoob.bsky.social/post/3lauv5lemlk2k
1. Trump says Congress is adjourned
2. All Republicans in the House and Senate walk out, leaving just Dems.
3. Since Dems make up less than half of each chamber, there's no quorum, which (I think) forces an adjournment anyway.
the point is that Trump cannot compel them to adjourn on his own
Though the fatalist in me is still worried about Stephen Miller’s proposal to just do what they want and maximize the stultifying lag time between action and judicial reaction (see Chad Wolf’s term in charge of Homeland Security)
my only argument here in this thread is that compelling the senate to adjourn is not one of those lawless things
Not a full-throated endorsement by Breyer, but probably enough for today’s SCOTUS to justify its likely deference.
Congress can't make decisions without a quorum.
There's nothing stopping 60 Republican senators or however many house members from just walking out.
Who will punish them?
Tim Snyder’s “On Tyranny” Lesson 1. Do not obey in advance.
"He just did."
A lot of folks will need neck braces with all the whiplash that is about to happen.
Its not an act of defiance. Forcing a Fed chair to resign isn't a thing that Trump has the power to do.
Its like if the CEO of a company you don't work for said "you're fired"... You simply are not fired.
See? It's not *all* bad!
Hope this link works:
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/law-and-chaos/id1727769913?i=1000676632518
The problem is that the Refs were corrupt and ignoring the rules in the first place.
(Also Air Bud was too young)
So if he breaks the law by dissolving Congress, we'd still have no Congress for months or years while he appealed up to SCOTUS.
And then they would say it was part of his job and so OK.
dipshits?
Trump might create a caucus of Joe Manchins trying to strong arm them like this.
Trump's record at picking Senate candidates is, you could say, mixed...
Sadly, it doesn't move the needle on my existential dread in this moment
He is the CinC of one of history’s most powerful militaries. He can do a lot.
Which isn't at all guaranteed, given that 1) they swear an oath to the Constitution, not him, and they generally take that pretty seriously and 2) he's done his damnedest to alienate them repeatedly.
To be clear, I’m not denying his obstacles. I don’t pretend he can wave a wand. I’m reminding everyone that he already has overcome most of the obstacles.
“Legal authority” who is going to enforce it. The pliant majority? SCOTUS?
This is the party in Roman history Caligula made a horse a Senator, and sliced open a pregnant woman.
But it's a fine line between warning about the worst case and complying in advance, and a lot of people are far on the wrong side of that line.
1. No recess and Senate rejects the crazier nominees
2. No recess and Senate somehow approves nominees
3. Congressional leaders acquiesce and voluntarily recess to allow appointments
4. He pushes for recess. They refuse and he responds unpredictably
But I wonder if anyone has told him about the statistical likelihood of Congress changing hands in midterm elections?
That how an authoritarian governs
I hope it holds in this particular instance, otherwise the slide into lawlessness could be severe. But I have no idea.
He promised that the start will be dark. He was never joking.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/11/11/trump-senate-recess-appointments-powergrab/
Further explanation from CRS:
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/RL/98-988
https://reason.com/volokh/2020/04/15/noel-canning-redux-justice-scalia-wrote-that-the-president-could-use-the-adjournment-power-to-block-senate-intransgience/
But I guess that is sooner than the inauguration.
It's not that I don't believe you. I'm just not familiar with what's happening
https://www.heritage.org/political-process/commentary/can-the-president-adjourn-congress-and-make-appointments-without