Awesome: Obama’s NRLB recess appointments ruled unconstitutional

A year ago Mark Levin encouraged anyone having to deal with the NLRB to sue them and challenge their authority in the courts because of Obama’s unconstitutional recess appointments. And apparently someone did and now the Federal Appeals court has rule the appointments were unconstitutional:

AP – President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.

The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions.

The ruling also throws into question Obama’s recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray’s appointment, also made under the recess circumstance, has been challenged in a separate case.


As I was going through the ruling I noticed that Landmark Legal was one of the litigants which means this is another victory for Levin and his team. I’m sure we’ll be hearing more about this later today. You can read the full ruling here (PDF).

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • joyfulgiver

    Finally a VICTORY in our favor!

  • Joe

    ************Start the IMPEACHMENT today!******************

    Yeah Right!


    Keep going!

  • PicklePlants

    Thank you Mark Levin!

    I wonder if this will go to the SCOTUS?

    • PVG

      Count on it!

  • TruLevinian

    F. Lee Levin is nobody to mess with!

    • Betsey_Ross

      I’ll bet he has more on his docket, too. Landmark could probably use some donations.

  • c4pfan

    Thank you for sharing scoop and hurray for Levin and the others!

  • v.l.

    Meh, Obama and dems will not care. They have Roberts to back them up. It may all be the Bush’s fault after all.

    • Conservative_Hippie

      Agreed, I’m wondering what “info” they have on Roberts that he’s making obvious decisions in ther favor?

      • Well…………he could have been told about a “slight possibility” of committing suicide – 7 shots to his back……

        • Conservative_Hippie

          It would have to be 7 since that’s clip limit on the pro gun control legslation. Oh the irony!

    • bobemakk

      Yes, the blame game all over again.

  • Rshill7

    Now Obama can be in contempt too if he hangs in there, and he and Holder can go on about their merry way.

    Seriously though, they should both receive a sternly worded letter for this, in about six months or so. It should utilize the sandwich method, where they are praised at the beginning and at the end, while the middle contains the dreaded, “shame on you” or something equally devastating.

    • Conservative_Hippie

      Yes, this is music to me ears 🙂

      • PVG

        Almost too good to be true!

  • We need to keep challenging the boy king.

    • nibblesyble

      heh..boy king! Good one Laurel…I may use that in the future, hope you don’t mind?

  • the hammering of Mark Levin by lamecherry bearing fruit.

    • Conniption Fitz

      Can you please explain?

      • Sober_Thinking

        Yeah… not connecting the dots on that statement either. Don’t recognize the contributor so I’m guessing it’s not a positive statement… Hope I’m wrong.

  • Conniption Fitz

    Heck, Obama is unconstitutional to begin with. As son of foreign nationals, and having been a foreign national himself, he was not qualified to be president according to the US Constitution.

    Moreover, the majority of his acts while in office have been audaciously unconstitutional.

    • Sober_Thinking

      Spot on.

    • Dittos Conniption Fitz “… to begin with.”

      However, this will be another opportunity thrown away by the radio BIG Talkers and BIG Bloggers.


      The radio BIG Talkers and BIG Bloggers never… never … never… EVER… comment about the ORIGINAL intent of the ORIGINAL words of the ORIGINAL ‘Birther’ document of our Republic, the U.S. Constitution, specifically Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 (A2 S1 C5), the ONLY place in the founding documents,

      – Declaration of Independence
      – Articles of Confederation
      – U.S. Constitution

      where ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘Citizen’ are contrasted in the SAME clause 5, in the SAME sentence, separated by a comma and the word ‘or’ that was obviously put there by the Founders for a reason.

      So, dittos to your sentiments Conniption Fitz, but the 5 year lack of a constitutional defense of A2 S1 C5 by the radio BIG Talkers and BIG Bloggers will just be ignored… again.


  • BHliberty

    This is a great cause for celebration but no time to rejoice for too long since the scoundrels in the Obama admin. will try to overturn. Let’s hope it stays!

    • notsofastthere

      Obama wants everything tied up in the court system, while he continues to rule by Executive Order. I heard a while back that the congress approved that appointments for the court no longer had to go through their approval, so they could speed up the backlog of appointments.

  • Sandra123456

    So, what difference does it make?

    • Orangeone

      This ruling defines “the” and “happen” and that is crucial. There is also very stern language in this order that will be cited in future cases. This is actually a HUGE victory for Conservatives.

      • Godisright

        I think SANDRA may be playing on Hillary’s remark the other day.
        In a facitious manner.

        • Orangeone

          Wasn’t sure, thanks for your perspective! The funny thing about the court decision, it did come down to the definition of two words “the” and “happen” which is kinda funny when you think about Billy Boy Clinton’s ‘it depends on what “is” is’…

          • Godisright

            Was remembering that debacle as well. It is a shame when we idolize people that actually would otherwise be humiliated in the arena of common sense and decency.

            • Orangeone

              Agree and how sickening that our current Congress does nothing about the potus’ illegal and unconstitutional actions compared to the bravery of the Congress against Clinton for his Monica behavior. We can’t even get a special investigator on Fast and Furious. Benghazi, drilling, funding mooslim terrorists, etc.

              • Godisright

                Right on!

  • Landscaper

    Great photo of the pouting Man Child.

    • Orangeone

      For once, I didn’t mind the ugly mug because you are correct!

  • colliemum

    If this does go to the Supreme Court, I’m confident Landmark Legal, i.e. Mark Levin, will not back down. They’ll certainly have the legal arguments absolutely watertight sewn up.

    • Orangeone

      The Supreme Court has to argue from this court decision too which is an excellent decision and filled with court cases cited by Landmark Legal in its amicus brief

  • Why didn’t the Senate bring this suit on their own behalf in the first place?

    • Rshill7

      The Senate? The one which Harry Reid is in charge of, and Joe Biden is the President of? That Senate?


      • Precisely my point.
        The Senate became an abomination in 1913 with the ratification of 17th Amendment.
        Subsequently, the 10th Amendment (and by extension the States and the People) was the first casualty of this drastic shift in the balance of power and the ELIMINATION of the States “equal suffrage” in the Senate.
        Here’s my suggested Petition to realign the power of the Senate back to the original intent of the framers and cause the restoration of the of the 10th Amendment.
        Please copy and distribute to others.

    • Sober_Thinking

      Great comment! Agreed… where are the Republicans?

      • Orangeone

        John Boehner on behalf of the House was also “amicus curiae” or “friend of the court” in this case, as was McConnell and 41 other members of the Senate.

    • aposematic

      You have a point since it was the Senate’s power Obuma was taking. But Reid most likely had a Clinton fit and shouted: None of that matters now…!

      • colliemum

        He shouted ‘what difference does it make’ – keep on message here, aposematic!


        • aposematic

          Get your point, since I mentioned Clinton I should have maintained the context.

          • colliemum

            That’s the ticket!


    • Orangeone

      The Senate was not harmed. Noel Corporation was the party harmed by the agency’s ruling and the Administrative Law Judge. The House and Senate were “friends of the court” not parties to the case.

  • Great news to begin the weekend

  • Sober_Thinking

    God bless Levin and his group. It’s good to see the truth and justice upheld for once.

    See? Some things are definitely getting done now… progress!

    Obama should be imeached… he has failed to honor what he swore to uphold on more than one occassion. It is criminal what he’s been able to get away with as pResident.

  • Nukeman60

    Well the process moves onward. The liberal approach is to defy the will of the people. When that defiance fails, sue. When that suit fails, appeal. When that appeal fails, take it to the Supreme Court. If that Supreme Court decision goes against them, then simply ignore the law (as many years have passed, many decisions have been made by the illegal defendants and the litigants are usually dead by that time, anyway).

    At any rate, this gives Obama time to appoint two more justices before this case is heard, at which time they will own the Court (as if they don’t own it now).

    • I am sure Roberts was told about some “unpleasant consequences” if he doesn’t follow orders….he’s not THAT stupid.

    • TexasPGRRider

      Yes Nuke, “Onward Thru the Fog”, which happens to be a bumper sticker produced in the late 60s by Oat Willies, a headshop in Austin located just west of the campus of the University of Texas to promote their business. A New meaning for an Old phrase…PRICELESS !!!!

  • nibblesyble

    Yes!! I swear I was going to hurl myself off my balcony(don’t worry only a 3 foot drop) if i heard or saw one more thing Obama and his DemocRats got away with. Very grateful to see this…Praise God.

    P.S. Congrats Levin…keep fighting!

    • sjmom

      Obama not worth a three foot drop, or a three inch drop for that matter. Keep the faith because I believe we will see more rulings like this.

      • nibblesyble


  • 1tootall

    Yeah, well, Obamacare had at least two setbacks at this level before it got to the Supreme Court, and we all know how THAT turned out.

    • sjmom

      Keep the faith and think positive; God is in control.

      • 1tootall

        no argument there!!

  • sjmom

    So, can we impeach him now on abuse of power?????????????????

    Kudos to Mark 🙂

  • how this cheater can look straight into a camera??!!?? He lost:
    From Bill O’Reilly’s message board:

    Most everyone suspected fraud, but these numbers prove it and our government and media refuse to do anything about it.

    As each state reported their final election details, the evidence of voter fraud is astounding. Massive voter fraud has been reported in areas of OH and FL, with PA, WI and VA, all are deploying personnel to investigate election results.

    Here are just a few examples of what has surfaced with much more to come.

    * In 59 voting districts in the Philadelphia region, Obama
    received 100% of the votes with not even a single vote recorded for
    Romney. (A mathematical and statistical impossibility).

    * In 21 districts in Wood County Ohio, Obama received 100% of
    the votes where GOP inspectors were illegally removed from their
    polling locations – and not one single vote was recorded for Romney.
    (Another statistical impossibility).

    * In Wood County Ohio, 106,258 voted in a county with only
    98,213 eligible voters.

    * In St. Lucie County, FL, there were 175,574 registered
    eligible voters but 247,713 votes were cast.

    * The National SEAL Museum, a polling location in St. Lucie
    County, FL had a 158% voter turnout.

    * Palm Beach County, FL had a 141% voter turnout.

    * In Ohio County, Obama won by 108% of the total number of
    eligible voters.

    NOTE: Obama won in every state that did not require a Photo ID and lost in every state that did require a Photo ID in order to vote.

    IMAGINE THAT ! ! !

    • sjmom

      I am from the Philadelphia region and Philly, like Chicago, is Corruption City. Been run by the Dems for years.

    • Joe

      What’s your beef?

      They kept it under >>>>>>>>>>> 200% !

      (Fraudster in Chief)

      Boehner should be impeached too!

    • tinlizzieowner

      You neglected to mention that Obama’s election organization was fined a million dollars for ‘donation irregularities’. 😉

      • he’ll pay it with our money.. 🙁

        • tinlizzieowner

          Of course he will. 🙁

    • Orangeone

      Aren’t some of these in Allen West’s district?

      • tinlizzieowner

        Yes. The vote count in Col. West’s district went from a couple thousand votes ahead for West to a couple thousand votes behind for West in a matter of minutes and nobody questioned it. Well, nobody in charge of election procedures, anyway.

    • mike3e4r7

      You mean someone in the media is actually saying this? It’s about time! Even conservatives, like Levin, who I highly suspect have been disturbingly quiet on this issue. Whenever it’s brought to Levin, he kind of akwardly changes the subject. I think he must feel it’s a losing battle. Don’t mean to single out Levin, cause others are guilty of silence on this. Maybe it is a losing battle, but there shouldn’t be silence.

  • 1endtimes2020

    Obama would really enjoy being a dictator. There are so many in Africa. He could go there and chum around with like-minded people, and learn how successful THEY were for the last 60 to 70 years.

    • sjmom

      Let’s chip in and buy him a one way ticket.

      • 1endtimes2020

        We’ll give him enough rope to ‘hang’ himself with an impeachment. He won’t stay in the U.S. and probably go to his Muslim Brotherhood friends, all on his own.

  • Rocco11

    Newsflash: Obama is a communist. We now return you to your regular programming…

    • Rshill7

      …entitled: “My Commie Mommy” (By B. Obamy)

      brought to you by Progressive Insurance, MSNBC and Red Bull.

      • Orangeone

        And Dick’s Sporting Goods (will no longer sell guns)

    • 1endtimes2020

      Love it, Rocco 11

  • 911Infidel

    So sad too bad.

  • PVG

    Bravo! Outstanding! God bless Mark Levin. I will be supporting Landmark Legal rather than wasting money with the RNC/GOP

  • TexasPGRRider

    When will the FRAUD and TREASON issues be addressed ???

  • notebene

    It’s about darned time our system of checks and balances yanked our dictator in chief back into line! The Chicago cronyism needs to stop!

  • anneinarkansas

    Let us hope that Chief Justice Roberts stays conservative this time. I no longer trust that man!

  • warpmine

    Somebody should have challenged his SCOTUS choices on the grounds he’s a usurper with no legal authority but then nobody on the bench really wants to embarrass the current government which includes the Congress.

  • Orangeone

    Landmark Legal was an amicus curiae which is “friend of the court” rather than a party to the case. The Petitioner is The Noel Corporation.

    From Wikipedia: “An amicus curiae (also amicus curiæ; plural amici curiae, literally “friend of the court”) is someone who is not a party to a case who offers information that bears on the case but that has not been solicited by any of the parties to assist a court. This may take of the form of legal opinion, testimony or learned treatise (the amicus brief) and is a way to introduce concerns ensuring that the possibly broad legal effects of a court decision will not depend solely on the parties directly involved in the case. The decision on whether to admit the information lies at the discretion of the court.”

    This is so very, very important because the Court approved Landmark Legal’s request and believed they added concerns vital to the case! John Boehner and Mitch McConnell (with 41 other Senators) were also amicus curiae in this case. This is understandable because they are part of Congress. I cannot wait to hear Mark Levin celebrate the Court’s acceptance of Landmark Legal as a “friend of the court”!

    Thanks for the pdf Scoop, I’m going to read the whole decision.

  • Patriot’s standing firm for the laws of our Constitution, Bill of Rights and The Declaration of Independence. excellent!!!

  • Guppymonster

    Obama hasn’t had the power to do ninety percent of the things he’s done but that hasn’t stopped him. When will Boehner grow a set of balls? I know it’s difficult for someone who craves approval of the Washington establishment but he can’t have it both ways and he’ll never have their approval. He’s an embarrassment.

    • Orangeone

      John Boehner was also an amicus curiae and an amicus brief was filed.

  • Levin is the best. Did he file an amicus curiae?

    The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president…

    That’s music to my ears. More embarrassment is to come, when liberalism fails.

    • Orangeone

      Yes as did the Senate and the House (posted that somewhere on this thread. It’s actually better as amicus curiae 🙂

  • LiveFreeOrDie2012

    RightScoop, you know I am a big fan of your website. But, I need to point a few things out here. First of all, “Federal Appeals” should technically not be capitalized. Secondly, and more importantly, the Honorable Mark R. Levin was not a litigant in the case. His legal foundation filed an amicus curiae brief with the appeals court.

  • Wigglesworth

    The left doesn’t care. They will continue to do it. Worst case scenario is their appointments get to make rulings for 6 months before getting kicked out. Once enough judges turn over then the rulings will start to come in the left’s favor. It’s like Voter ID. Even though several states have it and it has been ruled constitutional there are still judges that will block it when a state passes a voter ID law. Dirty Harry inserted the words “any discrimination” in the voting rights act that passed a while back so any voter ID law can be struck down on the flimsiest of evidence that it is racist.

  • Myptofvu

    Now we have to await the case to be heard in the Supreme Court. Has anybody bothered to calculate the court costs that Obama has caused? I mean just think about how much has been spent fighting Obamacare. The dollar figure must be staggering.

    Anyway, something I have been mulling over and would like some thoughts on. Germany’s high court is not one of Appeals meaning that it does not need to wait for a judgement and then an appeals process before it can look into a case.

    Do you think that changing our Supreme Court to this style which would allow them to be more proactive and address an issue right upfront instead of awaiting the appeal would be an improvement or not? and why.

  • Orangeone

    Sorry this is long but here are my favorite quotes from the ruling. Look for this decision to be cited frequently against Barky Boy!

    “When interpreting a constitutional provision, we must look to the natural meaning of the text as it would have been understood at the time of the ratification of the Constitution.”

    “It is well established that for at least 80 years after the ratification of the Constitution, no President attempted such an appointment, and for decades thereafter, such appointments were exceedingly rare.”

    “We will not do violence to the Constitution by ignoring the Framers’ choice of words.”

    “Allowing the President to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution’s separation of powers.

    “An interpretation of “the Recess” that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement, giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law.”

    “Recent Presidents are doing no more than interpreting the Constitution. While we recognize that all branches of government must of necessity exercise their understanding of the Constitution in order to perform their duties faithfully thereto, ultimately it is our role to discern the authoritative meaning of the supreme law.”

    “The Senate’s desires do not determine the Constitution’s meaning. The Constitution’s separation of powers features, of which the Appointments Clause is one, do not simply protect one branch from another. See Freytag, 501 U.S. at 878. These structural provisions serve to protect the people, for it is ultimately the people’s rights that suffer when one branch encroaches on another. As Madison explained in Federalist No. 51, the division of power between the branches forms part of the “security [that] arises to the rights of the people.” The Federalist No. 51, supra, at 320.”

    “The power of a written constitution lies in its words. It is those words that were adopted by the people. When those words speak clearly, it is not up to us to depart from their meaning in favor of our own concept of efficiency, convenience, or facilitation of the functions of government. In light of the extensive evidence that the original public meaning of “happen” was “arise,” we hold that the President may only make recess appointments to fill vacancies that arise during the recess.”

  • bongobear

    A scintilla of sanity in a snake infested swamp.

  • TickedWhiteDude

    He will somehow get his way…Constitution be dammed. This just made him mad, and we’re to weak to impeach him.

    • Orangeone

      This might have been what the Senate and House (both filed amicus briefs) were waiting for. As I’ve been reminded, Nixon was impeached in his 2nd term….

  • steprock

    “President Barack Obama violated the Constitution”

    I kinda stopped reading right there. Just sums it all up, don’t it?

    • Orangeone

      And the DC Federal Court of Appeals unanimously said so! Take a look at my large post, there are some great quotes in the court’s decision that can be used for any Constitutional challenge (i.e. 2nd Amendment)

  • Many DemocRATic senators belong to Communist Party:
    “It should come as no surprise that the Communist Party USA is on board with President Obama’s plan to attack Americans’ right to keep and bear arms as a means to “end gun violence.” A cardinal feature of communist regimes, like all dictatorships, is the prohibition of private ownership of arms, creating a monopoly of force in the hands of the State.
    In a January 18 article, People’s World, an official publication of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA), declared that “the ability to live free from the fear or threat of gun violence is a fundamental democratic right — one that far supercedes any so-called personal gun rights allegedly contained in the Second Amendment.”

  • americalsgt

    Well, let’s just hope that this is Obama’s Schecter Brothers moment. We could sure use some good news for the opposition party.

  • Orangeone

    This is one thing Mitch McConnell did RIGHT, appointed Miguel Estada to write the Senate’s amicus brief in this case!

    • sjmom

      Now, there’s an anomaly. McConnell……………something right. Mmmmmmmm

      • Orangeone

        I agree but the gentleman he selected has been before the SCOTUS 20 times!  And he’s a younger minority :):):):):) No more of the old white man label

    • TitaniumEagle

      Sir Turtle McConnell did something right? Must’ve been an accident!

  • Ray

    It will be overturned in the Roberts liberal supreme court!

    • Orangeone

      I don’t think so. In reading the appellate opinion, it is very, very strong in its Constitutional foundation.

      • Ray

        There were very stong arguments made in regards to the unconstitutional nature of the affordable care act, but, that was upheld.

        • Orangeone

          The only issue before the SCOTUS was the individual mandate.  Until we are levied the tax, we do not have standing to sue.  The SCOTUS upheld based on the gov’t’s ability to tax which has been found to be CONSTITUTIONAL previously.  The Constitutional issues were found in our favor.  There will be many, many more lawsuits yet, some are already up on the religious freedom claims.
          The NLRB case is substantially different

          • Ray

            But the government argued and Obama argued that it was NOT a tax, and then argued that the supreme court should not rule on the case at all when they switched their story of it being a tax, therefore the court had no reason to bring a decision until someone actually had to pay it with the anti-injunction act. They totally pulled that ruling out of the air, Roberts being the chief culprit. I think they have something on him, personally, and they will pull that string again. If there is something they are blackmailing him with, I hope it comes out.

            • Orangeone

              This is a classic case of bait and switch.  The gov’t got everyone focused on the Commerce Clause (which we did win, Constitutional portion) and then switched the argument to a tax which is Constitutional.  If you read the 2700 pages, you will find 21 taxes contained within so it’s not like they were unknown.
              Once we are subject to the tax, we have been harmed and have standing to sue.  And there are people just waiting to sue!  In my particular case, I will sue because I must pay for coverage I do not need, I will be taxed because I have too good of insurance and taxed if I cancel it.  I just have to wait.

              • Not only is this bill containing multiple taxes, there is also a provision in it that allows the government to change things @ will…
                Once fully implemented…….the Federal government will have total control over how doctors can treat individuals…and a data base of all our personal information. (this data base is already being implemented)
                I also believe in time the new system (aka Obamacare) will sink under it’s own weight..thus paving the way for Obama to save it with a single payer system, which was his plan all along.

                • Orangeone

                  MN has been collecting medical information for several years. They continue to experience privacy breaches in many state departments, can only imagine how much of our medical information has been reviewed, utilized and disseminated.  It is frightening. Our docs have also been asking about guns for years….It is time for it to end and WE are in the perfect position to do it.

                • Ray

                  are you from MN?

                • Orangeone

                  Unfortunately I live in MN

                • Ray

                  how can I get in contact with you? I live in Forest Lake.

                • Orangeone

                  Are you on Twitter?

  • tinlizzieowner

    Obama’s election was un Constitutional.

  • Finally, a little good news. We sure could use it. Maybe this is the beginning of putting the breaks on Obama’s imperial power? I sure hope it is.

  • Orangeone

    Landmark Legal Foundation has their amicus brief and press release on their home page. It was their “the Recess” position that the Court agreed with to find the appts unconstitutional! BTW, the Foundation is a 501(c)(3) corporation and accepts donations online.

  • E. Lee Zimmerman

    Awesome victory. It should be celebrated ad infinitum.

  • All I can say is about time!….but what took so long?

    • Orangeone

      The appts were in early 2012 so to reach a Ct of Appeals decision in less than one year is actually quite quick. The case was argued early December.

      • I do understand why, I was venting… lol!!…but its just soo frustrating, waiting for the “Wheels of Justice” to turn on these things.

        Hopefully this decision will hold up…… 🙂

        • Orangeone

          Sorry, I’ve only seen a couple of your posts so wasn’t sure of /sarc . This one actually did move quickly….I’m sure Barky will tell them to slooooooowwwwwww dddddddooooooowwwwwnnnnn their schedule….I read the entire decision, and although I am not an attorney, it is solid on Constitutional provision and long-standing case law (other court decisions). There is a nice write-up with decision quotes here

          • No apology needed….really!! Carolyn wrote a great analogy, thanks for the link!!! 🙂

            At the very least…. this court’s ruling will go toward the restoring the “constitutional separation of powers.”

            What is truly aggravating, is just this week we saw Obama re-take the oath of office…and even after this ruling….they continue to mock the Constitution and the courts who do not agree with them as this was their response to the ruling!

            Carney: “The White House strongly disagreed with the court’s decision, calling it “novel and unprecedented.”

            • Orangeone

              If you are on Twitter, you can follow the Constitutional Freedom Party @CFP4US !

  • Earthforce1

    NLRB are the guys who tried suing Boeing for daring to open a plant in SC.

    • snowshooze



    …also from the Great White North , your DEAR LEADER PART II O B A M A is a reflection of your low information VOTER and is also a J O K E of a leader .”

  • davienne


  • davienne

    mambo already whining about it…
    calls it unpresidented

  • martha chandler

    In this wretched darkness of our political times, a bright light comes through today.

  • 12grace


  • Orangeone

    Is it any surprise Obama is ignoring this court order? From Levin’s tweet:

  • davienne


  • wodiej

    Awesome. There’s more to be done.

  • stage9


  • Guppymonster

    Obama is a lawless criminal who stepped over the line one too many times. But he’ll do it again and again. He needs to be challenged anytime he does anything.

  • Godisright

    Go Mark Go!!! You da Man!
    Now, can Obama be charged with some sort of misconduct?
    Can we at the least see him in the corner with a dunce cap on his head?!!
    I am sick and tired of this jerk sliding around the law of this land without consequence.
    It’s time for the judges to throw the library at this egomaniac.

  • Pound Sand Traitor!!!

  • mediaaccess1

    I like it 1000 times

  • Great for the courts. Hopefully this is only the first of many firewalls that will stand against the subverts. Maybe we’re starting to move back to the right direction for Americas prosperity.

  • bobemakk

    Good, throw them all out and drag Obama out with them. He is ruining our country, and I just heard that our credit rating dropped again blame it all on him.