Recess appointment

Last updated

In the United States, a recess appointment is an appointment by the president of a federal official when the U.S. Senate is in recess. Under the U.S. Constitution's Appointments Clause, the President is empowered to nominate, and with the advice and consent (confirmation) of the Senate, make appointments to high-level policy-making positions in federal departments, agencies, boards, and commissions, as well as to the federal judiciary. A recess appointment under Article II, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution is an alternative method of appointing officials that allows the temporary filling of offices during periods when the Senate is not in session. It was anticipated that the Senate would be away for months at a time, so the ability to fill vacancies in important positions when the Senate is in recess and unavailable to provide advice and consent was deemed essential to maintain government function, as described by Alexander Hamilton in No. 67 of The Federalist Papers .

Contents

In modern times, the Senate is in session nearly year-round, making the recess appointment mechanism far less necessary or useful for upkeep of government function. Nonetheless, in recent times this power has also been controversially used as a political tool to temporarily install an unpopular nominee by sidestepping the Senate's role in the confirmation process; [1] the Senate has taken measures from time to time to prevent a president from making recess appointments, specifically by holding pro forma sessions. The Supreme Court affirmed that pro forma sessions are sufficient to prevent recess appointments and addressed other intricacies of the practice in NLRB v. Noel Canning (2014). Appointments made during a recess must be confirmed by the Senate by the end of the next session of Congress, or the appointment expires. In current practice, this means that a recess appointment must be approved by roughly the end of the next calendar year and thus could last for almost two years, if made early enough in the year.

Constitutional text

Article II, Section 2, Clause 3, commonly known as the Recess Appointment Clause, provides that,

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

History

Presidents since George Washington have made recess appointments. Washington appointed South Carolina judge John Rutledge as Chief Justice of the United States during a congressional recess in 1795. Because of Rutledge's political views and occasional mental illness, however, the Senate rejected his nomination, and Rutledge attempted suicide and resigned. Almost every president has used recess appointments to appoint judges, over 300 such judicial recess appointments before 2000, including ten Supreme Court justices. [2]

New Jersey judge William J. Brennan was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956 by a recess appointment. This was done in part with an eye on the presidential campaign that year; Eisenhower was running for reelection, and his advisors thought it would be politically advantageous to place a northeastern Catholic on the court. Brennan was promptly confirmed when the Senate came back into session. Eisenhower, in a recess appointment, designated Charles W. Yost as United States Ambassador to Syria. [3] Eisenhower made two other recess appointments, Chief Justice Earl Warren and Associate Justice Potter Stewart.

According to the Congressional Research Service, President Ronald Reagan made 240 recess appointments (average 30 per year) and President George H. W. Bush made 77 recess appointments (average 19 per year). George H. W. Bush appointed Lawrence Eagleburger as Secretary of State during a recess in 1992; Eagleburger, as Deputy Secretary of State, had in effect filled that role after James Baker resigned.

President Bill Clinton made 139 recess appointments (average of 17 per year).

President George W. Bush made 171 recess appointments (average of 21 per year). During the last two years of the Bush administration, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sought to prevent further recess appointments. Bush promised not to make any during the August recess that year, but no agreement was reached for the two-week Thanksgiving break, in November 2007. As a result, Reid did not allow adjournments of more than three days from then until the end of the Bush presidency by holding pro forma sessions. [4] [5] Prior to this, there had been speculation that James W. Holsinger would receive a recess appointment as Surgeon General of the United States. [6]

President Barack Obama made 32 recess appointments (through February 1, 2015), all to full-time positions. [1] Over what would have traditionally been the 2011–12 winter recess of the 112th Congress, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives did not assent to recess, specifically to block Richard Cordray's appointment as Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. [7] Both the House and Senate continued to hold pro forma sessions. [8]

In August 2017, nine pro forma sessions were set up to block President Donald Trump from making recess appointments. The concern was that Trump might dismiss Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and try to name his successor while Congress was in recess. [9] Pro forma sessions continued to be held until January 2019. They were held on December 31, 2018, [10] and again on January 2, 2019, the last full day of the 115th United States Congress, that lasted several minutes.

On April 15, 2020, while Congress was holding pro forma sessions due to the recess during the COVID-19 pandemic, President Trump threatened to adjourn both houses of Congress in order to make recess appointments for vacant positions such as the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Director of National Intelligence. [11] However, the U.S. Constitution only grants the President the authority to adjourn Congress if it is unable to agree on a date of adjournment, and both Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have indicated that they will not alter the planned date of January 3, 2021. [12]

Congressional action to prevent recess appointments

The Senate or House may seek to block potential recess appointments by not allowing the Senate to adjourn under Article 1, Section 5, Clause 4 of the Constitution, which provides that both Houses must consent to an adjournment. [13] This tactic is especially used when either House of Congress is controlled by a different party than that of the President, the Senate or House may seek to block potential recess appointments by not allowing the Senate to adjourn for more than three days, blocking a longer adjournment that would allow recess appointments to be made. [14]

In order to combat this tactic from Congress the President can adjourn Congress under Article II section 3 of the constitution that states

"He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States." (emphasis added)

According to Article II Section 2 of the constitution the President can appoint or fill up the vacancies that happen during a recess without the Senate's approval, but those positions will end at the end of the next legislative session unless Congress approves the appointment. [15]

"The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session."

Legality of intra-session appointments

According to Henry B. Hogue, of the Congressional Research Service's Government and Finance Division: [16]

Recent Presidents have made both intersession (between sessions or Congresses) and intrasession (during a recess within a session) recess appointments. Intrasession recess appointments were unusual, however, prior to the 1940s. Intrasession recess appointments have sometimes provoked controversy in the Senate, and there is also an academic literature that has drawn their legitimacy into question.

It has been argued that as the clause was originally understood, it was expected that if the Senate was in session when an office became vacant, the president would make a standard advice-and-consent appointment at that time. [17] In Federalist No. 67, Alexander Hamilton wrote: [18]

The ordinary power of appointment is confined to the President and Senate jointly, and can therefore only be exercised during the session of the Senate; but as it would have been improper to oblige this body to be continually in session for the appointment of officers and as vacancies might happen in their recess, which it might be necessary for the public service to fill without delay. ...

Another argument maintains that recess appointments were to be made only during inter-session recesses, which during the early days of the country lasted between six and nine months, and were therefore required to prevent important offices from remaining unfilled for long periods. The view holds that the current interpretation allows appointments to be made during recesses too brief to justify bypassing the Senate.

Historically, presidents tended to make recess appointments when the Senate was adjourned for lengthy periods. Since World War II, presidents have sometimes made recess appointments when Senate opposition appeared strong in the hope that appointees might prove themselves in office and then allow opposition to dissipate. Most recently, however, as partisanship on Capitol Hill has grown, [19] recess appointments have tended to solidify opposition to the appointee. [20]

Obama's challenge

Regardless of the Senate continuing to hold pro forma sessions, on January 4, 2012, President Obama appointed Richard Cordray and others as recess appointments. [21] [22] [23] White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler asserted that the appointments were valid, because the pro forma sessions were designed to, "through form, render a constitutional power of the executive obsolete" and that the Senate was for all intents and purposes recessed. [24] Republicans in the Senate disputed the appointments, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell stating that Obama had "arrogantly circumvented the American people" with the appointments. It was expected that there would be a legal challenge to the appointments. [25]

On January 6, 2012, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion regarding recess appointments and pro forma sessions, claiming,

"The convening of periodic pro forma sessions in which no business is to be conducted does not have the legal effect of interrupting an intrasession recess otherwise long enough to qualify as a "Recess of the Senate" under the Recess Appointments Clause. In this context, the President therefore has discretion to conclude that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advise-and-consent function and to exercise his power to make recess appointments". [26] [27]

Judicial challenges

However, this was widely disputed. [28] [29] The first such challenge was announced in April 2012, disputing a National Labor Relations Board ruling made following the Obama appointments. [30] [31]

On January 25, 2013, in the first circuit case to rule on the validity of the January 4, 2012, appointments, Chief Judge David Sentelle, writing for a unanimous three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, wrote

"an interpretation of 'the Recess' 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." [32]

On June 26, 2014, in a 9–0 ruling, the United States Supreme Court validated this practice of using pro forma sessions to block the president from using the recess appointment authority. Justice Breyer also wrote in NLRB v. Noel Canning that the President could force a recess if he had enough congressional support:

"The Constitution also gives the President (if he has enough allies in Congress) a way to force a recess. Art. II, §3 ('[I]n Case of Disagreement between [the Houses], with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, [the President] may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper'). Moreover, the President and Senators engage with each other in many different ways [*28] and have a variety of methods of encouraging each other to accept their points of view. Regardless, the Recess Appointments Clause is not designed to overcome serious institutional friction. It simply provides a subsidiary method for appointing officials when the Senate is away during a recess." [33]

On July 16, 2013, the U.S. Senate confirmed Cordray to a five-year term as Director. [34]

Prior to National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning , there was a split among the circuit courts on the validity of intra-session appointments and on what vacancies can be filled using the Recess Appointment authority. Following the 2003 intra-session appointment of William H. Pryor, Jr., to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, a small number of criminal defendants, whose appeals were denied by panels including Pryor, appealed on the basis that Pryor's appointment was invalid. The Eleventh Circuit, in an en banc decision in Evans v. Stephens [35] [36] held that the Constitution permitted both intra-session recess appointments and recess appointments to fill vacancies that "happened" prior to rather than during the congressional recess.

However, NLRB v. Noel Canning, Circuit docket 12-1115 in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, appealed a decision made by National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) members appointed, in what President Obama determined was an intra-session recess was decided in a three-member panel decision on January 25, 2013, that intra-session appointments were unconstitutional because the word "the" before the word "Recess" in the Constitution was determined to mean to limit it to only the inter-session recess, and it further limited the power by limiting it to only those vacancies that "happen" to occur during the inter-session break, not to vacancies that existed prior to the recess. [32] Also, on March 16, 2013, the Third Circuit joined the D.C. Circuit and held that the March 2010 appointment of Craig Becker to the NLRB was invalid because he was not appointed between sessions. [37]

On June 26, 2014, the United States Supreme Court rejected both holdings, [38] while also unanimously deciding that President Obama overreached his authority in appointing members to the NLRB while the Senate was still formally in session. [39] Justice Stephen Breyer, in the majority opinion, wrote that the Constitution allows for the Congress itself to determine its sessions and recesses, that "the Senate is in session when it says it is", and that the President does not have the unilateral right to dictate Congressional sessions and thus make recess appointments. [39] However, the decision allows the use of recess appointments during breaks within a session for vacancies that existed prior to the break.

See also

Related Research Articles

Article One of the United States Constitution Portion of the US Constitution regarding Congress

Article One of the United States Constitution establishes the legislative branch of the federal government, the United States Congress. Under Article One, Congress is a bicameral legislature consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Article One grants Congress various enumerated powers and the ability to pass laws "necessary and proper" to carry out those powers. Article One also establishes the procedures for passing a bill and places various limits on the powers of Congress and the states from abusing their powers.

Article Two of the United States Constitution Portion of the US Constitution regarding the executive branch

Article Two of the United States Constitution establishes the executive branch of the federal government, which carries out and enforces federal laws. Article Two vests the power of the executive branch in the office of the president of the United States, lays out the procedures for electing and removing the president, and establishes the president's powers and responsibilities.

National Labor Relations Board

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is an independent agency of the federal government of the United States with responsibilities for enforcing U.S. labor law in relation to collective bargaining and unfair labor practices. Under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 it supervises elections for labor union representation and can investigate and remedy unfair labor practices. Unfair labor practices may involve union-related situations or instances of protected concerted activity. The NLRB is governed by a five-person board and a General Counsel, all of whom are appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate. Board members are appointed to five-year terms and the General Counsel is appointed to a four-year term. The General Counsel acts as a prosecutor and the Board acts as an appellate quasi-judicial body from decisions of administrative law judges.

A pocket veto is a legislative maneuver that allows a president or another official with veto power to exercise that power over a bill by taking no action instead of affirmatively vetoing it. This depends on the laws of each country; the common alternative is that if the president takes no action a bill automatically becomes law.

The term pro forma is most often used to describe a practice or document that is provided as a courtesy or satisfies minimum requirements, conforms to a norm or doctrine, tends to be performed perfunctorily or is considered a formality.

Prorogation in politics is the action of proroguing, or ending, an assembly, especially a parliament, or the discontinuance of meetings for a given period of time, without a dissolution of parliament. The term is also used for the period of such a discontinuance between two legislative sessions of a legislative body.

Commission on Appointments

The Commission on Appointments is a constitutional body which confirms or rejects certain political appointments made by the President of the Philippines. The current commission was created by the 1987 Constitution.

Presentment Clause United States Constitutional clause governing how bills are passed into laws by Congress

The Presentment Clause of the United States Constitution outlines federal legislative procedure by which bills originating in Congress become federal law in the United States.

Richard Cordray 1st Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Richard Adams Cordray is an American lawyer and politician who served as the first Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) from 2012 to 2017. Prior to his appointment, Cordray variously served as Ohio's Attorney General, Solicitor General, and Treasurer. He was the Democratic nominee for Governor of Ohio in 2018.

Appointments Clause Clause of the U.S. Constitution granting the President the right to appoint posts with the Senates advice and consent

The Appointments Clause is part of Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, which empowers the President of the United States to nominate and, with the advice and consent (confirmation) of the United States Senate, appoint public officials. Although the Senate must confirm certain principal officers, Congress may by law delegate the Senate's advice and consent role when it comes to "inferior" officers.

The Saxbe fix, or salary rollback, is a mechanism by which the President of the United States, in appointing a current or former member of the United States Congress whose elected term has not yet expired, can avoid the restriction of the United States Constitution's Ineligibility Clause. That clause prohibits the President from appointing a current or former member of Congress to a civil office position that was created, or to a civil office position for which the pay or benefits were increased, during the term for which that member was elected until the term has expired. The rollback, first implemented by an Act of Congress in 1909, reverts the emoluments of the office to the amount they were when that member began his or her elected term.

In the history of the United States, there have been approximately 32 unsuccessful recess appointments to United States federal courts. 22 individuals have been appointed to a United States federal court through a recess appointment who were thereafter rejected by the United States Senate when their name was formally submitted in nomination, either by a vote rejecting the nominee, or by the failure of the Senate to act on the nomination. These individuals served as federal judges, having full authority to hold office and issue rulings, until their rejection by the Senate. Five individuals were appointed but resigned either before the Senate voted on their nomination, or before a formal nomination was even submitted. Another five individuals were appointed but never assumed the office.

A lame-duck session of Congress in the United States occurs whenever one Congress meets after its successor is elected, but before the successor's term begins. The expression is now used not only for a special session called after a sine die adjournment, but also for any portion of a regular session that falls after an election. In current practice, any meeting of Congress after election day, but before the next Congress convenes the following January, is a lame-duck session. Prior to 1933, when the 20th Amendment changed the dates of the congressional term, the last regular session of Congress was always a lame duck session.

Nomination and confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States political process

The nomination, confirmation, and appointment of Justices to the Supreme Court of the United States involves several steps set forth by the United States Constitution, which have been further refined and developed by decades of tradition. Candidates are nominated by the President of the United States and must face a series of hearings in which both the nominee and other witnesses make statements and answer questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which can vote to send the nomination to the full United States Senate. Confirmation by the Senate allows the President to formally appoint the candidate to the court. The Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, thus the President may nominate any individual to serve on the Court.

United States Senate Upper house of the United States Congress

The United States Senate is the upper chamber of the United States Congress, which, along with the United States House of Representatives—the lower chamber—constitutes the legislature of the United States. The Senate chamber is located in the north wing of the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is an agency of the United States government responsible for consumer protection in the financial sector. CFPB's jurisdiction includes banks, credit unions, securities firms, payday lenders, mortgage-servicing operations, foreclosure relief services, debt collectors and other financial companies operating in the United States. Since its founding, the CFPB has "engaged the 21st century" by using technology tools to monitor how financial entities used social media and algorithms to target consumers.

Kathryn Ruemmler

Kathryn "Kathy" Ruemmler is an attorney who formerly served as Principal Deputy White House Counsel and then White House Counsel to President Barack Obama. Previously a partner at Latham and Watkins co-chairing its white-collar defense group, Ruemmler is Global Head of Regulatory Affairs at Goldman Sachs as of April 2020.

We Can't Wait is a policy initiative launched by the U.S. President Barack Obama's administration in October 2011 to institute policies by executive orders, administrative rulemaking, and recess appointments. The initiative was developed in response to the United States Congress' unwillingness to pass economic legislation proposed by Obama, and conflicts in Congress during the 2011 debt ceiling crisis.

National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S. 513 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously ruled that the President of the United States cannot use his authority under the Recess Appointment Clause of the United States Constitution to appoint public officials unless the United States Senate is in recess and not able to transact Senate business. The Court held that the clause allows the president to make appointments during both intra-session and inter-session recesses but only if the recess is of sufficient length, and if the Senate is actually unavailable for deliberation. The Court also ruled that any vacancy in an office can be filled during the recess, regardless of when it arose. The case arose out of President Barack Obama's appointments of Sharon Block, Richard Griffin, and Terence Flynn to the National Labor Relations Board and Richard Cordray as the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

References

  1. 1 2 Hogue, Henry B. (March 11, 2015). "Recess Appointments: Frequently Asked Questions" (PDF). CRS Reports. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service . Retrieved February 10, 2018.
  2. Arnold, Tim (Spring 2011). "Recess Appointments". UVA Lawyer.
  3. "Marine Embassy Security Guard historical archives". Msg-history.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  4. "Days in Session Calendars U.S. Senate – 110th Congress 2nd Session". Thomas.loc.gov. December 31, 2008. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  5. "Senate Calendar – December". Democrats.senate.gov. Archived from the original on June 6, 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  6. "Reid To Bush: No Recess Appointments Wanted". Cbsnews.com. November 16, 2007. Retrieved May 30, 2011.
  7. "GOP Furious As Obama Recess Appoints Cordray". Tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  8. Mcconnell, Michael (January 10, 2012). "Democrats and Executive Overreach". The Wall Street Journal.
  9. Senate blocks Trump from making recess appointments over break
  10. Werner, Erica; Kane, Paul; Sonmez, Felicia (December 27, 2018). "Shutdown set to extend into new year after Congress punts on budget, border votes". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 27, 2018. Retrieved December 27, 2018.
  11. Zilbermints, Regina (April 15, 2020). "Trump threatens to adjourn both chambers of Congress". TheHill. Retrieved April 19, 2020.
  12. "Explainer: Does Trump have the authority to adjourn US Congress?". www.aljazeera.com. Retrieved April 19, 2020.
  13. Article 1, Section 5, Clause 4: Adjournment of the Constitution says: "Neither House ... shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days".
  14. "Obama's Sham Constitutionalism". Cato.org. January 5, 2012. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  15. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii
  16. [ dead link ]
  17. PDF, "The Original Meaning of the Recess Appointments Clause", UCLA Law Review, Volume 52, Number 5 (June 2005), pp. 1487–1578.
  18. "The Federalist #67". Constitution.org. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  19. Moody, James; Mucha, Peter J. "Portrait of Political Party Polarization". Cambridge University Press . Retrieved July 15, 2013.
  20. David R. Stras; Ryan W. Scott (2007). "Navigating the New Politics of Judicial Appointments" (PDF). Northwestern University Law Review. Princeton University Press . Retrieved July 15, 2013.
  21. Clarke, Dave & Matt Spetalnick (January 4, 2012). "Stymied by Congress, Obama to boldly seat nominees". Chicago Tribune . Retrieved January 5, 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  22. Cooper, Helene & John H. Cushman, Jr. (January 4, 2012). "Defying Republicans, Obama to Name Cordray as Consumer Agency Chief". The New York Times . Retrieved January 5, 2012.
  23. Cooper, Helene; Steinhauer, Jennifer (January 4, 2012). "Bucking Senate, Obama Appoints Consumer Chief". The New York Times . Retrieved January 5, 2012.
  24. Savage, Charlie. "Obama Tempts Fight Over Recess Appointments". Thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  25. "Analysis: Obama consumer chief decision under a legal cloud". Reuters.com. January 5, 2012. Retrieved December 26, 2016 via Reuters.
  26. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on January 18, 2012. Retrieved February 2, 2012.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  27. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on January 18, 2012. Retrieved February 2, 2012.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  28. "The Constitution Is Clear On Recess Appointments - Ricochet". Ricochet.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  29. The Corner The one and only. (January 5, 2012). "Richard Cordray & the Use and Abuse of Executive Power". National Review. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  30. O'Keefe, Ed (April 18, 2012). "Senate GOP joining legal action against Obama recess appointments". The Washington Post.
  31. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on May 9, 2012. Retrieved April 17, 2012.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  32. 1 2 "Noel Canning, A Division of the Noel Corporation, Petitioner v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent" (PDF). Sblog.s3.amazonaws.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  33. "Bloomberg Law - Document – NLRB v. Noel Canning, 134 S. Ct. 2550, 189 L. Ed. 2d 538, 199 LRRM 3685, 82 U.S.L.W. 4599 (2014), Court Opinionwebsite2.bloomberglaw.com" . Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  34. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on May 2, 2012. Retrieved August 21, 2012.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  35. Evans v. Stephens, 387 F.3d 1220 (11th Cir. 2004).
  36. "Re: Summary of Evans v. Stephens : Order of the Court" (PDF). Media.aclj.org. October 14, 2004. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  37. "Re: Third Circuit Ruling Against Presidential Recess-Appointment Authority". CNationalreview.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  38. "Replacing Scalia: Could Obama make a recess appointment?". Europe.newsweek.com. Retrieved December 10, 2016.
  39. 1 2 "Senate 9, President 0." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, June 26, 2014. Web. June 28, 2014.

Further reading