In response to:

Court to Obama Admin: Actually, Those Recess Appointments Were Unconstitutional

Free_Markets_Free_People Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:24 PM
pro forma.
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:43 PM
curtail the power of presidents to make recess appointments far into the future.

Obama made a serious error here. He rolled the bones and lost...and may have actually caused the Office of the Presidency to lose some of its power. Not exactly what a Progressive POTUS wants to do.
Resist, We Much!!! Wrote: Jan 25, 2013 2:41 PM
Not entirely because the court went much further than addressing pro forma sessions. It said:

"The appointment may be made in “the Recess,” but it ends at the end of the next “Session.” The natural interpretation of the Clause is that the Constitution is noting a difference between “the Recess” and the “Session.” Either the Senate is in session, or it is in the recess. If it has broken for three days within an ongoing session, it is not in “the Recess.”...It is universally accepted that “Session” here refers to the usually two or sometimes three sessions per Congress. Therefore, "The Recess" should be taken to mean only times when the Senate is not in one for those sessions."

This decision, if it stands, will seriously

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals today unanimously slapped down the controversial “recess” appointments President Obama made to the National Labor Relations Board way back in early January of 2012, in what the Associated Press rightly calls an “embarrassing setback.” Indeed, if the Supreme Court upholds the decision, it very well may nullify everything the board has done since the appointments, as it won’t have actually had the quorum of three members required to issue regulations. Ouch.

The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking...