Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Hippo_Tron

(25,453 posts)

11. The political question doctrine is pretty fucking clear

Reply to onenote (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 26, 2013, 11:18 PM

Jan 2013

The Supreme Court said that it's not the judicial branch's job to get in a dispute over whether Congress or the President has the authority to take the nation to war and thus they wouldn't rule on the War Powers Act.

How in god's name could the appeal's court look at that ruling and decide, "well the political question doctrine says we can't rule on disputes involving taking the nation to war, but we can totally rule on a dispute over whether three days constitutes a recess or not"?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

20 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Someone please explain how a Federal Appeals Court could suddenly decide to strike down Obama's [View all] busterbrown Jan 2013 OP

Because The Senate was not adjourned and wasn't in an official recess, they were holding ... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #1

Your best answer John2 Jan 2013 #4

they went very far here and pretty much evicorated recess appointments dsc Jan 2013 #7

The challenge that could be made for vacancies only occuring only during a recess LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #8

An interesting article on the link below Tx4obama Jan 2013 #9

Here's a link below from the Legal Times website Tx4obama Jan 2013 #2

Because Ralph Nader was in cahoots with Repubs and W in 2000. Judges show Bush/Gore not the same graham4anything Jan 2013 #3

I've studied the recess appointment issue for a long time: my analysis onenote Jan 2013 #5

Thanks a lot.......Seems to me that this court by 2 to 1 is not interested in redefining recess busterbrown Jan 2013 #6

The political question doctrine is pretty fucking clear Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #11

If its so clear how come its never been treated as a political question? onenote Jan 2013 #12

I suppose the NLRB and the DOJ's attorneys should've listened to this guy, then Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #14

Also, read the 11th Circuit's decision on this matter in Evans vs Stephens Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #16

It is cited only with respect to one narrow argument onenote Jan 2013 #18

They completely ignored the political question doctrine Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #10

This message was self-deleted by its author onenote Jan 2013 #13

The political question doctrine pretains to disputes between the President and Congress Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #15

Unfortunately the issues decided by the court are not political questions onenote Jan 2013 #17

I respect your opinion, but here's my bottom line... Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #19

We'll have to agree to disagree on whether DC Circuit departed from applicable precedent onenote Jan 2013 #20