No, Trump Cant Just Dismiss the Senate

Published

2 months ago

December 16, 2024

admin

Donald Trump has not even returned to office, and already a constitutional crisis may be in the making. Trump has started announcing the people he intends to nominate for positions in his new administration. That is his prerogative. Several senators have criticized some of Trumps choices. That is their prerogative (and two Trump nominees have already withdrawn under pressure). But rumors have been circulating of a plan to have Trump dismiss the Senate altogether, in a desperate effort to jam his nominees into office. There is simply no way to do this consistent with the text, history, and structure of the Constitution.

The Constitution and laws require the Senates approval to fill many of the governments most important officessuch as attorney general or secretary of stateall of which wield extraordinary powers on behalf of the public. The Senates involvement helps to ensure that the people in these jobs have the necessary competence and integrity. In Alexander Hamiltons apt words, the Senate can prevent the appointment of unfit characters who would be no more than obsequious instruments of the presidents pleasure.

The Senates check on the president can of course lead to friction and frustration at the start of an administration, while a new presidents nominees are considered and sometimes even rejected by the Senate. Advice and consent takes time. But as Justice Louis Brandeis famously observed, checks and balances exist not to promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The purpose of the Constitution is not to avoid friction but to save the people from autocracy.

Read: The Senate exists for a reason

That is why any effort to cut the Senate out of the appointments process would be troubling; it is disdainful of self-government under a Constitution altogether. Trumps supporters have suggested two ways to get around the Senates advice-and-consent process. In the first, the Senate would vote to go into recess soon after Trumps inauguration, allowing him to unilaterally make a series of recess appointments. That plan may formally be legal, but it is plainly improper. The president is authorized to make recess appointments to ensure the continued functioning of the Federal Government when the Senate is away, as Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the Supreme Court in 2014. That mechanism was vital in an age when the Senate was frequently absent from the capital for months at a time and could not quickly and easily reconvene. But, as Breyer also noted, the Constitution does not give the President the authority routinely to avoid the need for Senate confirmation. For the Senate to go into recess at the beginning of a new administration for the sole purpose of allowing the president to fill up the government with whomever he pleasesall while the Senate is controlled by the presidents party and perfectly capable of considering his nomineeswould be a clear misuse of the recess-appointment power. Happily, the new Senate seems to agree, balking at Trumps request that it surrender its prerogative so meekly.

As a result, some House Republicans have begun to discuss a more extreme scheme, one Trump considered during his first term: Trump could instead send the Senate home against its will and fill the government during the resulting recess. This is flagrantly unlawful.

How, one might ask, would such a plan even work? After all, the president, unlike an absolute monarch, does not have the power to dismiss Congress whenever he wants. Three of the first six abuses and usurpations charged in the Declaration of Independence related to King George IIIs treatment of legislatures: He had dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, he had refused to hold elections after these dissolutions, and he had called together legislative bodies at distant and uncomfortable places. The Framers were careful not to entrust the new office of president with such potent tools of tyranny. Instead, the president was given the power to adjourn the houses of Congress in only one narrow circumstance: in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment. This power is so limited that it has never been used in all of American history.

Read: How Trump could make Congress go away for a while

The House Republicans idea seems to be to manufacture a disagreement to trigger this adjournment power. First, the House of Representatives would pass a resolution calling for a recess. The Senate would then (in all likelihood) refuse to pass the resolution. Trump would then declare the houses to be in disagreement and adjourn both houses for as long as he likes. From there, he would start his recess-appointments spree. There is just one glaring problem: The disagreement in this scenario is illusory.

Under the Constitution, each house can generally decide for itself how long it will sit. As Thomas Jefferson, an expert on legislative procedure, wrote in 1790: Each house of Congress possesses [the] natural right of governing itself, and consequently of fixing its [sic] own times and places of meeting.

The Constitution limits this autonomy in one key way: Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting. In other words, if one house of Congress wants to leave in the middle of a session, it has to get the permission of the other house. The House of Representatives cant just skip town if the Senate thinks important legislative business remains. But note that this provision limits each houses power to adjourn, and not each houses power to remain sitting. Neither house needs the agreement of the other to stay in session. If the Senate wants to let the House of Representatives leave while it considers appointments or treaties, that is perfectly fine. Indeed, there are plenty of examples of one house giving the other permission to go home. Under Article I, then, each house requires consent of the other to quit, but not to sit.

Read: The flaw in the presidents newest constitutional argument

Hence the trouble for the House Republicans plan: If the House of Representatives wants to recess, the Senate can simply let it. And if the Senate agrees to let the House go, the House can leave and there is no relevant disagreement for the president to resolve by adjourning Congress. The Senate would still be in session as normal.

The presidents adjournment power is not a backdoor way for one house of Congress to force the other into recess against its will. If both the Senate and the House want to leave, but cannot agree on a time of adjournment, then the president can step in. In the words of a 19th-century treatise by Justice Joseph Story, an intervention from the president in that kind of situation is the only peaceable way of terminating a controversy, which can lead to nothing but distraction in the public councils. Perhaps if one house of Congress wants to leave, but the other house wont let iteffectively holding it hostage in the capitalthe president could also step in to resolve that disagreement by releasing the house that wants to leave. During the ratification debates in Virginia, James Monroe questioned whether it was proper that the members of the lower house should be dependent on the senate, given that they are prevented from returning home without the senates consent. James Madison responded by pointing to the presidents adjournment power.

What some House Republicans seem to be suggesting is worlds away from those scenariosit is closer to the prorogation or dissolution power claimed by the British Crown and reviled by the Founders. Simply put, the House of Representatives cannot collude with the president to deprive the Senate of its constitutional power to advise and consent on appointments. That would make a mockery of the Constitutions text and structure. If the House attempts this maneuver, the Senate should resist it by continuing to meet, and the courts should refuse t recognize any resulting appointments. The threat to adjourn the Senate should be seen and called out for what it is: an autocratic move that is not just unlawful but contemptuous of constitutionalism.

World

Pope Francis has ‘initial, mild’ kidney problem and still in critical condition, says Vatican

Published

2 hours ago

February 23, 2025

admin

Pope Francis has 'initial, mild' kidney problem and still in critical condition, says Vatican

The Pope remains in a critical condition and is now showing an “initial, mild” kidney problem – but is “vigilant” and took part in Mass in hospital with those caring for him.

The Vatican statement said Francis hadn’t had any more “respiratory crises” since Saturday evening.

However, a problem with his kidneys has emerged, with blood tests showing “an initial, mild, renal insufficiency, which is currently under control”, according to the update.

The 88-year-old Pope is still having “high-flow oxygen therapy” into his nose, while his hemoglobin value has increased after being given blood transfusions on Saturday.

The Pope has been at Rome’s Gemelli hospital since 14 February and is being treated for double pneumonia and chronic bronchitis.

Sunday evening’s statement said he was “vigilant and well oriented”, but due to the complexity of his case the prognosis is “reserved”.

“During the morning, in the apartment set up on the 10th floor, he participated in the Holy Mass, together with those who are taking care of him during these days of hospitalization,” the update added.

On Sunday morning, the Vatican said the Pope had a “tranquil” night and confirmed he would not lead prayers for the second week running.

Instead, Francis, who has been Pope since 2013, prepared words to be read on his behalf at the recitation of the Angelus.

‘I ask you to pray for me’

The Pope’s message said: “I am confidently continuing my hospitalisation at the Gemelli Hospital, carrying on with the necessary treatment; and rest is also part of the therapy!

“I sincerely thank the doctors and health workers of this hospital for the attention they are showing me and the dedication with which they carry out their service among the sick.

“In recent days I have received many messages of affection, and I have been particularly struck by the letters and drawings from children.

“Thank you for this closeness, and for the prayers of comfort I have received from all over the world! I entrust you all to the intercession of Mary, and I ask you to pray for me.”

The message is understood to have been written in the last few days.

On Saturday night, the Vatican said the Pope was in a critical condition after a “prolonged respiratory crisis” that required a high flow of oxygen.

It said he’d had blood transfusions after tests revealed thrombocytopenia, which is associated with anaemia.

Millions around the world have been concerned about his increasingly frail health – and his condition has given rise to speculation over a possible resignation.

Faith is never lost but it feels optimism is fading

By Lisa Holland, Sky correspondent in Vatican City

It’s hard to imagine a Sunday in the Vatican City without the Pope. Every week – unless he’s travelling – he is a constant, appearing at the same Vatican windows to deliver his message.

Instead, his written words were distributed by Vatican officials. In his message, the Pope thanked his doctors and people around the world for their good wishes.

But it seems the upbeat message was written before the dramatic downturn in the Pope’s health, which has left him in a critical condition. The business and the events of the Church are continuing in his absence.

Faith is never lost but it feels like optimism is fading and we are living through the last days of Pope Francis.

In St Peter’s Square the sun shone – and a gentle light fell on the ancient stone of the basilica.
The beauty and pageantry of columns of deacons and visitors filing in for a special mass as part of the Catholic Church’s jubilee year sat awkwardly with the prognosis of the Pope’s ailing health.

The visitors and deacons who’d come from around the world to take part, and hoped to see the Pope, were left disappointed. Though they said they felt his presence. “It is what it is,” said one.

They know the Pope is an 88-year-old man who has spent the last few years assisted by a wheelchair and walking stick. Throughout his life he has been dogged by lung issues.

It leaves an almost philosophical mood ahead of what the coming days may bring.

Doctors said on Friday that he was “not out of danger” and was expected to remain in hospital for at least another week.

They also warned that while he did not have sepsis, there was always a risk the infection could spread in his body.

Sepsis is a complication of an infection that can lead to organ failure and death.

Pope Francis has a history of respiratory illness, having lost part of one of his lungs to pleurisy as a young man. He also had an acute case of pneumonia in 2023.

Environment

Volvo Penta set to show off its new BESS subsystem at bauma 2025

Published

4 hours ago

February 23, 2025

admin

Volvo Penta set to show off its new BESS subsystem at bauma 2025

Volvo Penta BESS subsystem to be Bauma highlight

Volvo Penta will debut its latest modular and scalable battery energy storage system (BESS) platform for the off-grid construction and mining industries at the bauma equipment show – here’s what you can expect.

Best-known for its marine engines and gensets, Volvo Penta is the power production arm of the Volvo Group, specializing in putting energy to work. Operating under the tagline, ‘Made to Move You’, Volvo Penta is headed to bauma 2025 with a plan to keep construction, port shipping, and mining operations moving productively and competitively throughout their transitions to battery and (in theory, at least) hydrogen power.

To that end, the company will show off a job site ready version of the scalable and modular BESS subsystem concept shown last year.

Volvo says its new, modular BESS subsystem will enable other OEMs and third party system integrators to seamlessly deploy electric power to meet the ever-exceeding energy needs in construction and mining.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

“Our modular and scalable battery-electric platform is designed to support the electrification ecosystem—combining high-performance drivelines with the crucial energy storage subsystems for efficient charging and operation in construction and mining,” says Hannes Norrgren, President of Volvo Penta Industrial. “We want to meaningfully collaborate with our customers on value-added customization that will enable them to stay productive, efficient, and future-ready.”

The Penta substation at bauma will be built around the company’s “Cube” battery pack, an energy-dense solution with a favorable C-rate designed to make it easy for BESS manufacturers to offer more compact job site solutions capable of charging and discharging energy with high levels of speed and efficiency, enabling both stationary and mobile BESS configurations that can change and grow to meet the evolving needs of a given asset fleet or project.

A Volvo Penta-developed DC/DC unit converts the voltage from the Cube battery packs (600 V) into lower voltage (24 V) for powering auxiliaries and portable offices.

Electrek’s Take

BESS concept packed with Penta Cube batteries; via Volvo.

Volvo Penta has always provided power. Historically that’s been from combustion, but the company is looking ahead, developing products that will bring energy to job sites, tractors, and more long after the last ICE engine shuts down.

SOURCE | IMAGES: Volvo Penta.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

World

Exit poll may appear decisive – but path to coalition is not clear yet

Published

5 hours ago

February 23, 2025

admin

Exit poll may appear decisive - but path to coalition is not clear yet

Initial exit polls appear to confirm what we have known for weeks: that the conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) and their Bavarian sister party the Christian Social Union (CSU) have got the most votes in the federal election, with Friedrich Merz most likely to be the next chancellor.

While this result isn’t a surprise, it doesn’t mean the path to power will be easy.

First off, the CDU-CSU don’t have a majority so they need to try to build a coalition.

Their most obvious choices as partners are the third-place Social Democrats. A two-party coalition is preferred as it can avoid excess bickering but the SPD and CDU disagree on several key points including sending long-range Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine.

Follow live: Germany’s election results

Forming a government can take months but Mr Merz is keen to speed up the process – aware of the pressing issues both at home and abroad.

One of those is the rise of the far right, with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party celebrating historic results.

The initial results suggest that for the first time since the Second World War, a far-right party has got the second highest number of votes.

That could also cause serious issues for the next government.

As a result of Germany‘s Nazi history, mainstream parties have a long-running pact known as the “firewall” which says they will not work with the far right.

Even before the polls had closed, AfD leader Alice Weidel echoed Donald Trump and released a video statement urging people to “observe” the ballots being counted and to “protect democracy”.

Many of the AfD’s supporters have said not allowing the second most popular party into government is undemocratic, threatening to take to the streets.

The US vice president JD Vance also sparked outrage when he spoke out against the firewall at the recent Munich Security Conference and suggested the new Trump administration would be ready to work with the AfD.

Conversely, in the run-up to the election, hundreds of thousands of Germans have protested to demand that the firewall remains.

In January, Mr Merz caused controversy when a draft motion got through parliament with AfD support, he’s since vowed he will not go into government with them.

If he sticks to that pledge then he is likely to see right-wing demonstrations as well becoming a target of prominent AfD backers including Elon Musk.

The AfD’s result also cannot be ignored. While some of the vote may be a protest, the party has expanded its traditional base in the east to pick up support in the west.

Dissatisfaction over migration, the economy, rocketing prices and the war in Ukraine have all helped to grow its ranks as people feel ignored by mainstream parties.

Mr Merz has already tried to win back some of its voters by proposing tough migration reforms including permanent checks on the borders and potentially turning away some asylum seekers when they try to enter.

If he fails to deliver on these promises then the AfD will continue to make gains.

Other urgent to dos for the next government include sorting out Germany’s economy following two years of recession and restoring its position at the centre of the EU.

Ministers must also face up to the fact their traditional allies are no longer guaranteed.

The Trump administration appears to be ripping up the rule book when it comes to being a protector of Europe and its ongoing support for Ukraine.

If America steps back, as Europe’s largest power and Ukraine’s largest European backer, Germany will have to step up.

Again, that’s going to be a big challenge as its military needs to be transformed.

The final results are not even confirmed yet but whatever form it takes, the next government knows it has four years to fix Germany, if it fails then populists are highly likely to ride to power in 2029.