Talk:Recess appointment

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

United States courts and judges High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Presidents / Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

logical impossibility

"Because of Rutledge's political views and occasional mental illness, however, the Senate rejected his nomination, and Rutledge subsequently attempted suicide and then resigned." Is that a bad joke? He resigned after committing suicide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.198.203 (talk) 05:26, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody said anything about his committing suicide. -- 76.15.128.206 (talk) 03:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the constitution allows Congress to declare themselves out of session and then immediately starting a new session in order to terminate any existing recess appointments. Why has Congress never done that? -- 67.180.150.227 (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, most likely this will require a vote, and again most likely 60 votes will be needed for something like this to pass. It would not be easy to find so much support for an unprecedented manoeuvre like this. Also, there would probably be a lot of additional work to be done, in that all committee assignments would have to be fixed again etc. Probably this would not be seen as a productive use of time. --KarlFrei (talk) 08:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

The entire first half of this article, until the story turns to Bolton, is completely without references. Many facts and figures are mentioned without any support, for instance, the amount of recess appointments done by recent presidents. I tagged this article with the refimprove tag. --KarlFrei (talk) 08:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and I am very sorry to report very little solid progress in this regard, despite hard efforts today. The article remains a mess. 73.211.140.61 (talk) 05:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Obama administration recess appointments

Obama today announced 15 recess appointments. I think this deserves mention in the article. --Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 04:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why? This article doesn't list every other president's recess appointments. -Rrius (talk) 06:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To put it another way, what does this announcement tell us about recess appointments generally? -Rrius (talk) 06:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My point is, these appointments stir up controversy, regardless of which president or political party does it. There was controversy when Bush the younger made recess appointments, and now there is news coverage of Obama's recess appointments (for example, MSNBC covered it. I'm not taking sides in this debate, nor am I trying to rationalize the behavior of either party. I'm just saying that some mention of it should be made. --Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 22:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So far the reaction has been perfunctory. There is nothing about it to suggest that it is anything like the Clinton or Bush appointments. If we include this set of appointments, do we include another set in the summer if he appoints at the August recess? Do we mark every time a president makes a recess appointment from here forward? It is always news when a recess appointment is made, but it does not follow that every news event about recess appointments belongs in this article. As I said, this is about the recess appointment power, not about each and every instance where a recess appointment has drawn a negative comment from the opposition party. There is nothing especially controversial about the appointments or the reaction this time; the reaction has, as I've said, been muted. The difference between this and the Bush appointments is that the appointments were controversial because of the people named, the positions filled, and the wider battle over nominations that nearly led to the elimination of the filibuster, and because of the reaction on the part of Democrats, most importantly the use of pro forma sessions to prevent further instances. -Rrius (talk) 23:17, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eastlaw was prescient, esp. in light of NLRB v. Noel Canning. They should have been told to make their bold edit, if only because of their name. 73.211.140.61 (talk) 05:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of appointment totals

Why are you playing politics suddenly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.241.49.131 (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read the edit summary. This is not an article about how many recess appointments the last five or six presidents made, nor is it in any sense a list of recess appointments or numbers of recess appointments. It is, instead, meant to actually explain what the recess appointment power is. If that information is to be included, it should be included for all presidents, and done in a table at a separate article similar to List of United States presidential vetoes. Finally, your accusation of "playing politics" is objectively stupid. If the numbers were only removed from presidents of one party, you might have a point, but that is not what happened. -Rrius (talk) 18:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yost appointment by Eisenhower

Just browsing through and found mention of attempted CIA coup in Damsacus in 1957. Although there may have been a coup attempt, and may have been CIA involvement, I'd really like to see at least one really nice reliable source on that before including it, even as a passing reference. I'd be comfortable with something like "alleged CIA involvement" provided a reliable source could be found for that statement. I did confirm the Yost recess appointment, and referenced it. TreacherousWays (talk) 19:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

US states?

Aren't recess appointments also made in US states by governors? Maybe some information on this should be added to the atricle. --Governor Jerchel (talk) 11:14, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Recess appointment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Federal focus

This article focuses exclusively on U.S. federal government. However, reccess appointments exist elsewhere. For instance, the Illinois constitution gives the governor the ability to make recess apointments. SecretName101 (talk) 18:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

D'accord. 73.211.140.61 (talk) 05:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Virginia Tech supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

How can the long lead of a long article, the article in significant part summarising the presidential use of a U.S. Constitutional provision (the appointments clause), then make no mention of any U.S. President in the lead? And how in a 350 word lead can the clause itself (so few in words) not be explicitly stated—even as the organising framework for explaining conflicting ideas about it? And then, how can there be no citations in the lead, when the article itself is so poorly sourced? (Were it not, the lead could be left this bare, but not if the article itself is badly done.) 73.211.140.61 (talk) 05:34, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"how can there be no citations in the lead" Extremely easy. Wikipedia leads are summarizing the rest of the article and should have no citations of their own. Dimadick (talk) 09:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]