Corporate Accountability

5-4 Split Upholds Broad Recess Appointments Power

Washington, DC – On news this morning that the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, Constitutional Accountability Center released the following reaction:

 

“While the Supreme Court voted unanimously to strike down the particular exercise of the Recess Appointments Clause power in the Noel Canning case,” said CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra, “more important, the Court – by a sharply divided 5-4 vote – rejected the sweeping arguments made by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and its allies.”

 

“Similar to the dynamic seen in the Court’s 2008 ruling in Heller v. District of Columbia,” continued CAC Appellate Counsel Brianne Gorod, “the bulk of today’s opinion was an originalist battle over the Constitution’s text and history, except that the liberal Justices prevailed on the two most sweeping claims made in the case. While the Court’s unanimous ruling upholding the use by Congress of certain pro forma sessions to prevent recesses from occurring will surely contribute to the gridlock we are seeing in Washington, the 5-4 portions of the Canning ruling preserve the core of this important constitutional provision.”

 

#

 

Resources:

 

CAC’s “friend of the court” brief in NLRB v. Noel Canning: http://theusconstitution.org/sites/default/files/briefs/CAC_Canning_Merits_Amicus_Brief.pdf

 

“Role Reversals Emerge in Fight Against Recess Appointments,” Carl Hulse, New York Times, January 11, 2014: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/11/us/politics/role-reversals-emerge-in-fight-against-recess-appointments.html

 

“Big Battles Brewing Over the Constitution’s Original Meaning,” Doug Kendall and Tom Donnelly, October 2, 2013: http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/2237/big-battles-brewing-over-constitution%E2%80%99s-original-meaning

 

CAC’s Brianne Gorod will also be participating in SCOTUSBlog’s symposium on Noel Canning, contributing a piece analyzing the ruling.

 

##

 

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.

 

###

More from Corporate Accountability

Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Comey v. Department of Justice

In Comey v. Department of Justice, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the Attorney General can fire an Assistant U.S. Attorney in contravention of legal protections...
Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Access to Justice
----- Supreme Court -----

Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Supreme Court is considering whether employees of federally funded educational institutions can bring Title IX suits for sex discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 16, 2026

CAC Release: Todd Blanche’s Record Disqualifies Him From Serving as America’s Lawyer

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to this week’s confirmation hearings on Todd Blanche’s nomination to...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DHS Probationary Employees 1 Class v. Department of Homeland Security

In DHS Probationary Employees 1 Class v. Department of Homeland Security, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering whether the Trump Administration’s efforts to unilaterally reshape the federal government through...