Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

The DC Court of Appeals has just ruled that almost all recess appointments are unconstitutional:

Strictly curbing the President’s power to temporarily fill government posts to keep an agency in operation, the D.C. Circuit Court ruled Friday that the constitutional authority to fill a vacancy can only be used when one Congress has ended and before a new Congress comes to town, or when there is a formal break at the end of one session, but not during any other mid-session break. That part of the ruling by the three-judge panel was unanimous. On a second part, a two-judge majority ruled that the vacancy-filling power only applies to vacancies that actually open up during a formal recess, between sessions or between Congresses. Because lower courts are split on both issues, this historic controversy over the constitutional separation of powers is likely to go on to the Supreme Court.

In the current atmosphere of partisan gridlock, which often involves thwarting of presidential nominations, the ruling provides a major new opportunity for a minority in the Senate to deny the President the authority even temporarily to put a new government officer to work in a vacant spot. When a vacancy arises while Congress is in session, and the Senate does not act on it, the President will not be able to fill it during the next time the Senate takes a break. The ruling came one day after the Senate chose not to make a major change in its filibuster rule, which is the main weapon of a Senate minority seeking to challenge presidential action.

I expect an appeal to the Supreme Court, though they may ask for an en banc hearing by the whole court of appeals first.

Unsurprisingly, David Sentelle, the right winger who gave us Ken Starr, is a part of this.

The 2^nd part of the ruling ruling, where they say that the only recess that counts is the few days every two years when the old Congress has ended, and the new Congress is sworn in, flies in the face of over 150 years of precedent.

As to the pro-forma sessions, Obama needs to go Article 2 Section 3 of the Constitution on Congress:

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 mine)

So, with the House refuses to adjourn, which is what led to the pro-forma sessions, Obama can adjourn them.

As to the claim that recess appointments can only be made during intercongress recesses, and not intracongress recesses, I cannot believe that the Supreme Court could support that, but since Bush v. Gore, I've made it a point of never underestimating the politicization of the right wing of that body.