May 23, 2012

Did the White House Just Accidently Torpedo The Quickie Election Rules?

On Jan. 4, 2012 President Obama announced the recess appointment of three members to the NLRB and set-off a small firestorm over executive authority. The president's position is that the Senate was not still in session because the "pro forma" sessions it had been holding since Dec. 20, 2011 (during which the Senate is gaveled into order for a few seconds before recessing again) were nothing more than a sham. The White House issued a statement declaring “gimmicks do not override the president’s constitutional authority to make appointments to keep the government running.”

If the position of the Obama Administration is that the Senate's pro forma sessions were a sham and do not count as the Senate being in session, then the law of unintended consequences may have caught up with it. The Constitutional provision that permits recess appointments also provides that such recess appointments end when the Senate adjourns its session sine die or without a future day. If the Senate sessions from Dec. 20, 2011 on were a sham and the Senate actually had adjourned, then all of the President's prior recess appointments had their terms end on that date as well. This would include NLRB Member Craig Becker who was part of the two member majority that adopted the quickie election rules that were pushed through at the end of the year.  Those new union-friendly rules were adopted on Dec. 21, 2011 and published in the Congressional Record on Dec. 22, 2011 - all after the Senate sessions proclaimed by the White House to be a sham began. 

Attempting to reconcile defense of the new recess appointments and the quickie election regulations could require some legal gymnastics. 

© 2012 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Partner

Scott J. Witlin is a partner in the Los Angeles office of Barnes & Thornburg and a member of the firm’s Labor and Employment Law Department and the Entertainment and Music Practice Group. Mr. Witlin handles traditional labor and employment matters, including arbitrations, collective bargaining negotiations, compliance with various guild and union agreements, and union organizing campaigns. He represents clients in the entertainment and broadcasting, video game manufacturing, retail, consumer and industrial products, and transportation industries.

310-284-3777

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.