NLRB to Appeals Court: F U

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by JamesL, Jan 27, 2013.

  1. JamesL

    JamesL

    NLRB: We will continue to act despite the Appeals Court decision

    Mark Gaston Pearce, chairman of the National Labor Relations Board, issued the following statement in reaction to today’s DC Appeals Court decision that President Obama use of recess appointments to install three people on the NLRB last year was unconstitutional. The action renders the board without a quorum to act and potentially invalidates a year’s worth of actions and rulings by it. Pearce indicated that the NLRB will attempt to continue on regardless:

    The Board respectfully disagrees with today’s decision and believes that the President’s position in the matter will ultimately be upheld. It should be noted that this order applies to only one specific case, Noel Canning, and that similar questions have been raised in more than a dozen cases pending in other courts of appeals.

    In the meantime, the Board has important work to do. The parties who come to us seek and expect careful consideration and resolution of their cases, and for that reason, we will continue to perform our statutory duties and issue decisions.


    Pearce, in short, is indicating that the NLRB’s strategy is to act as if the court’s ruling that the appointments were unconstitutional somehow only applies only to the particular case that went before the Appeals Court and hope that the White House can get the Supreme Court to quickly review the case.

    It’s a pretty brazen strategy, but consistent with a broader administration strategy to simply ignore the court’s ruling.


    http://washingtonexaminer.com/nlrb-...article/2519736?custom_click=rss#.UQSYzkQrGCl
     
  2. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    So...they're going to ignore the court ruling. According to our resident girly men bleeding hearts I thought only right "wingers" did that.
     
  3. pspr

    pspr

    I think that is illegal for them to ignore the court. I suspect any orders they issue to companies about labor relations can also be ignored by those companies.
     
  4. I know agencies will take this position when a district court rules against them, but to do it with a Court of Appeals ruling is pretty cheeky.

    They are in an awkward position however. He is right. Another court of appeals could rule in their favor, leading to a Supreme Court decision. On the other hand, a court of appeals ruling has more force than just for the particular case. At a minimum, it apples across that federal Circuit. If the NLRB continued to take actions in that circuit, i would think they would be looking at sanctions, possibly including contempt citations.

    The whole mess shows why it is a bad idea to ignore the Constituion as obama has a habit of doing. You just don't want potential situations where an agency is acting without any lawful authority. It opens up numerous cans of worms.

    This position also continues the Obama administration's practice of ignoring court cases that displease them. Recall they did the same thing with the case involving the Gulf drilling moratorium.
     
  5. cstfx

    cstfx