Article 2, Section 3, Clause 2 -- US Constitution

[DRoseDARs]

Apropo the current kerfuffle over did he didn't he, there's this:

"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."

Last time the part about Congress was invoked:
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Turnip_Day_Session.htm



Thoughts? Comments?

[Hosnon]

1. I don't think "convene" necessarily means "have every member of both chamber

physically present".

I think it more likely means "not in recess".

[DRoseDARs]

2. Thank you for having the first response NOT a freak out.

:hug:

[NYC Liberal]

3. Yes, the president can convene Congress against their will. However,

Congress does not have to let the president speak. That is entirely their prerogative; they make the rules about who is allowed on the floor and who can address either or both chambers.

The president has to ask and be invited to address Congress -- even for the State of the Union speech. Congress could, if it wanted, refuse to allow the president to address them in person for the SOTU and tell him to send them a transcript or something.

Notice that Truman did not address Congress; he simply forced them to reconvene to make a about them being a "do-nothing" Congress. They proved him right trying to spite him by refusing to pass any legislation.

[vaberella]

4. + Great post. n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

5. You could argue that the part about delivering information on the state of the union

Entitles him to speak. There's no precedent for it and since some Presidents have delivered it in writing, there's a good case that it doesn't. But the constitution doesn't explicitly say how he ought to deliver information on the state of the union. It also says from time to time, not once a year.

The Supreme Court would never take this up because of the political question doctrine. Hell, they won't event take up a case on which branch has the power to make undeclared war because of that doctrine.

[NYC Liberal]

7. True. But, realistically, Congress is not going to

deny a president's request to speak anyway, though they may try to assert themselves by dickering over scheduling.

It's one of those Constitutional technicalities that theoretically could be an issue, but probably never will -- just like how the 25th Amendment requires a president's disability to be confirmed by the Vice President but has no provisions if a president becomes disabled after the VP has died or resigned without having been replaced yet.

[DRoseDARs]

6. Again, another level-headed post. Refreshing tonight.

:hug: