Labor Law

NLRB v. Canning — Study Notes

NLRB v. Noel Canning, 573 U.S. 513 (2014)

Study notes for NLRB v. Canning: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.

The President cannot make recess appointments during pro forma sessions of the Senate as they do not constitute a true recess.
Professor Notes

This case is pivotal in understanding the limitations of presidential power regarding recess appointments. The Supreme Court's ruling reinforced the notion that the Senate's ability to conduct business, even in short pro forma sessions, limits the President's authority to make recess appointments. Professors would emphasize the constitutional interpretation of 'recess' and its implications for the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches.

Additionally, the Court’s decision underscores the need for clarity in the Recess Appointments Clause. It challenges the executive branch's attempts to sidestep Senate confirmation processes, which are foundational to the checks and balances envisioned by the framers. This case serves as a critical reference point for future discussions on executive appointments and the scope of presidential authority.

Cold Call Prep
  1. 1Explain why the Supreme Court ruled the appointments invalid in NLRB v. Canning.
  2. 2Describe the implications of this case for presidential powers regarding appointments.
  3. 3What is the significance of the Senate's pro forma sessions in the context of this decision?
  4. 4How does this case relate to the historical interpretation of the Recess Appointments Clause?
  5. 5Discuss the dissenting opinions in NLRB v. Canning and their rationale.
Mnemonic Device

PEACE - President's power does not apply if the Senate is always in 'pro forma' sessions.

Distinguish From
CaseDistinction
NLRB v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co.Mackay involved issues of employer unfair labor practices, not the limits of presidential powers.
U.S. v. NixonNixon focused on executive privilege rather than the scope of the President's authority to make appointments.
Department of Commerce v. New YorkThis case dealt with administrative discretion and census-related issues, rather than pertinent constitutional appointment powers.
Policy Arguments

For the Rule

Limiting the President's ability to make appointments during pro forma sessions enhances legislative oversight and reinforces the Senate's role in the appointment process.

Against the Rule

Restricting recess appointments could hinder the President's ability to fill important vacancies during periods when the Senate is not in session, potentially paralyzing government functions.

Class Discussion Points
  • What are the broader implications of this ruling on executive and legislative relations?
  • How might future Presidents respond to the limitations imposed by this decision?
  • In what ways could this case influence future constitutional interpretations of 'recess'?
  • Explore historical examples of recess appointments prior to this ruling.
  • How has this case changed the landscape of labor relations as seen through the lens of NLRB decisions?
Exam Angle

This case frequently appears on exams to examine the constitutional boundaries of executive power, particularly in relation to legislative authority and recess appointments. Expect hypotheticals involving pro forma sessions and the validity of appointments made during these periods.

Ace Your Cold Calls with Briefly

Get AI-powered case briefs, study notes, and cold call prep for every case in your casebook.