Supreme Court faces new challenges over recess appointments
- A Supreme Court ruling from 2014 established limits on recess appointments, stating the Senate wasn’t in recess during that time.
- This ruling could impact similar actions by President-elect Donald Trump regarding his Cabinet appointments.
- The evolving makeup of the Supreme Court may lead to different interpretations of the recess appointment clause in the future.
In January 2017, with Donald Trump set to take office, a potential conflict over recess appointments emerged, particularly regarding appointments to the Cabinet and other key positions. The Supreme Court has a limited history with recess appointments, having ruled on only one case in over two centuries. The decision came during the Obama administration when the Supreme Court determined that the Senate was not in recess during Obama's appointments and established that breaks needed to last at least ten days for a recess appointment to be valid. Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion pointed out that the recess appointment power is somewhat outdated, as Congress can be summoned quickly so that critical vacancies can be filled. However, the composition of the court has shifted with Trump’s appointments of Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, raising questions on how a more conservative court might approach recess appointments in the future. Former President Trump's allies suggested invoking a constitutional provision to force congressional recesses to facilitate appointments, but there is contention over the validity of such a move. This discord highlights both the importance of recess appointments in government and the ongoing debates about congressional powers.