# Barry could still force Merrick Garland onto court during ‘intersession recess’



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

I posted about this being a possibility in November and given what Douche nozzle has done recently, I am beginning to expect that he will actually do it.



> President Obama will have one last chance to force Judge Merrick Garland onto the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday - but it's a legal gamble and one that has so many pitfalls that even those who say he could get away with it believe it isn't worth the fight.
> 
> Mr. Obama's moment will come just before noon, in the five minutes that the Senate gavels the 114th Congress out of session and the time the 115th Congress begins.
> 
> In those few moments the Senate will go into what's known as an "intersession recess," creating one golden moment when the president could test his recess-appointment powers by sending Judge Garland to the high court.


Obama could still force Merrick Garland onto Supreme Court during 'intersession recess' - Washington Times


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

RedLion said:


> I posted about this being a possibility in November and given what Douche nozzle has done recently, I am beginning to expect that he will actually do it.
> 
> Obama could still force Merrick Garland onto Supreme Court during 'intersession recess' - Washington Times


If that happens the new congress could impeach Garland immediately.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

And the lame RINOs are bucking the "nuclear option " the demonic rats used in the Senate.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

I put absolutely nothing past Obama in his quest to create as much havoc as possible for Trump.
The man is so anti - American is is beyond belief.


----------



## Urinal Cake (Oct 19, 2013)

He really is crapping his diaper, isn't he?


----------



## DerBiermeister (Aug 15, 2014)

Slippy said:


> If that happens the new congress could impeach Garland immediately.


Ain't going to happen because you have to have cause to impeach. You can't just impeach someone because you want to.

As for it being a shitty last gasp move by Obama -- like it or not, that 5-min period tomorrow is officially a Congressional recess. There would be one hell of a shit storm and probably end up quickly in the courts and going all the way to the Supreme Court BEFORE Jan 20. That would now be a tie vote because I would assume Garland would have to recuse himself since the case would be about him, in which case a split decision would effectively uphold the ruling of a lower court (presumably a state supreme court). Not knowing what a lower court decision would be ... give it a 50/50 chance that Garland would survive a challenge.


----------



## azrancher (Dec 14, 2014)

If Obummer does this he will go down in History as the slimiest President that we have ever had.

Oh wait, he will anyway, so there's no loss for him.

*Rancher *


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Sure they can, but it would be difficult. The House could probably come up with a plausible reason and vote for impeachment but I doubt 2/3 of the Senate would vote to Impeach, as is necessary according to The Constitution.

Article III, Section I of the US Constitution states; The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,...". Prove "Bad Behaviour" and you can remove a Judge. I'm pretty sure there are many instances of Garland showing "Bad Behaviour".

Article II, Section II states..."all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Prove a "Misdemeanor" and the House can begin impeachment process.



DerBiermeister said:


> Ain't going to happen because you have to have cause to impeach. You can't just impeach someone because you want to.
> 
> As for it being a shitty last gasp move by Obama -- like it or not, that 5-min period tomorrow is officially a Congressional recess. There would be one hell of a shit storm and probably end up quickly in the courts and going all the way to the Supreme Court BEFORE Jan 20. That would now be a tie vote because I would assume Garland would have to recuse himself since the case would be about him, in which case a split decision would effectively uphold the ruling of a lower court (presumably a state supreme court). Not knowing what a lower court decision would be ... give it a 50/50 chance that Garland would survive a challenge.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Slippy said:


> If that happens the new congress could impeach Garland immediately.





Slippy said:


> Sure they can, but it would be difficult. The House could probably come up with a plausible reason and vote for impeachment but I doubt 2/3 of the Senate would vote to Impeach, as is necessary according to The Constitution.
> 
> Article III, Section I of the US Constitution states; The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour,...". Prove "Bad Behaviour" and you can remove a Judge. I'm pretty sure there are many instances of Garland showing "Bad Behaviour".
> 
> Article II, Section II states..."all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Prove a "Misdemeanor" and the House can begin impeachment process.


Unfortunately just because Garland tends to be a left leaning centralist doesn't mean he can be impeached and I for one would be just as disappointed with Congress for doing so without good reason as I would be for Obama circumventing the Senate to appoint him.

Either way its a mute point. If Obama does make Garland a recess appointment its only valid until the Senate goes back into session and he'll either be confirmed or more likely denied and Trump will get to pick who he wants.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

But wouldn't it be fun to watch the heads of the libs explode!



NotTooProudToHide said:


> Unfortunately just because Garland tends to be a left leaning centralist doesn't mean he can be impeached and I for one would be just as disappointed with Congress for doing so without good reason as I would be for Obama circumventing the Senate to appoint him.
> 
> Either way its a mute point. If Obama does make Garland a recess appointment its only valid until the Senate goes back into session and he'll either be confirmed or more likely denied and Trump will get to pick who he wants.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Recess appointments expire at the end of the Senate's next session, or when the recess appointee is formally confirmed by the Senate, or when another individual is nominated, confirmed and permanently appointed to the job.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> Recess appointments expire at the end of the Senate's next session, or when the recess appointee is formally confirmed by the Senate, or when another individual is nominated, confirmed and permanently appointed to the job.


Judge Napolitano said that Garland would be on the court for two years before taken off if Barry chose to appoint Garland during the recess. The judge also said that he did not see Garland accepting even if appointed as he would have to give up his life time appointment on the circuit court for a two year gig.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Slippy said:


> But wouldn't it be fun to watch the heads of the libs explode!


Lol. Its really entertaining now watching them scramble because the top item on the agenda is repealing Obama Care and they have no chance of stopping it this time. Not to mention they can't touch Trumps cabinet picks because of rules they changed about filibustering confirmation hearings.


----------



## Urinal Cake (Oct 19, 2013)

This is Fake News.


----------



## MisterMills357 (Apr 15, 2015)

It wouldn't do him any good, it would be rescinded by President Trump, and the Republican Congress. 
President Obama is finished; and his fascist ways as President are finito, right along with his term as dictator-in-chief. 
There are limits to what he can do, without being tried later, in federal court as a defendant: and he knows it too, he is a lawyer after all.


----------

