Noel Canning Case Study

Words: 469
Pages: 2

Wellington Baumann
1) Bluebook Citation: National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S._ (2014)
2) Parties: National Labor Relations Board (petitioner), Noel Canning (respondent).
3) Procedural History: The National Labor Board found that Noel Canning had unlawfully denied a collective-bargaining agreement with a labor union. Noel Canning appealed to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on the grounds that the National Labor Relations Board lacked a quorum because three out of the five Board members had been unconstitutionally appointed by President Obama on January 4, 2012. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit sided with Noel Canning. The case was appealed to the Court and the Court granted
…show more content…
• The Senate adopted a resolution to convene pro forma sessions on every Tuesday and Friday from December 20, 2011 to January 20, 2012.
5) Arguments:
The petitioner argued that the Senate was in recess when President Obama made his appointments because the Senate was not conducting any business. Just because the Senate could possibly conduct business during the pro forma sessions does not prevent the Senate from being in recess.
The respondent argued that since the Senate meet every three days in pro forma sessions, the Senate was not in recess when President Obama made his appointments. Therefore, President Obama violated the Recess Appointments Clause in Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution.
6) Issues:
• Was the Senate in recess during the pro forma sessions?
7) Legal Rules:
• A ten-day break between sessions of the Senate must exist before the President may evoke the Recess Appointments Clause.
8) Reasoning: The Court reasoned that the term “recess” should be a period of considerable time. The three days between pro forma sessions do not constitute such a considerable length of time. Additionally, pro forma sessions cannot be considered recesses because the Senate still has the ability to conduct