Out smarted again: Obama suffers his fifth major courtroom defeat since the beginning of the year. A "Constitutional expert" my but . . . it ain't true.

Last Monday (May 14), the Obama Administration suffered yet another Court room  defeat.  This time, the Administration lost on a technicality.  The issue? An end run around the failed "card check" legislation using the NLRB to institute "ambush" elections.  

The Marxist inspired Democrat Party supports the unionization of a company  (any company) via placing a check on a card as opposed to a secret ballot vote.  They could not get this Stalinist legislation passed through congress,  so Obama decided to void the will the of the people (again), circumvent Congress,  and use a federal agency (the NLRB) to accomplish much of the same thing.  

As it turns out,  the NLRB had only two votes in favor of the regulation, the two Democrat members appointed to the board, by Obama,  using a controversial "recess appointment rule" at the end of the year, 2011.   At the time the rule was approved, the  headlines read "By a vote of 2 to 1, NLRB approves ambush elections."  The fact of the matter was quite different.   The vote was not "2 to 1"  but,  "2 to Zero."  The third member of the board (five members are to be on this board - three is a quorum), a Republican,   did not participate in the vote.  The regulation was over-ruled by the Federal Court because of this failure.  There were several other legal issues in the suit, none of which were addressed by the court. As it turns out,  the "quorum" rule was a no brainer and the end of the matter in the Court's opinion.   The regulation was defeated in Federal Court without review of the associated legal issues.  

As a sidelight,  Obama's sense of cleaver manipulation was defeated by the GOP.  He had thought he could ignore the rules,  and appoint his [two] pundits to the Labor Relations board, giving him a majority vote of 2 to 1.  Problem:  all the GOP had to do to void this bit of cleaverness was to not vote.  How simple is that strategy !!!  How ignorant is your president for not seeing  this strategy?  What an absolute dufus.   

_____________________

End notes: 

1.   Why does the union controlled Democrat Party continue to work for unConstitutional elections using "car check" and the "ambush" rule?

Unions win 87 percent of elections held 15 days or less after a request, a rate that falls to 58 percent when the vote takes place after 36 to 40 days, according to a February report by Bloomberg Government.

2.   Here is the news blurb from McQuireWoods:

On May 14, 2012, United States District Judge James Boasberg of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia struck down the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) newly implemented regulations governing union elections. This new rule, commonly referred to as the "ambush" election rule, was published on Dec. 22, 2011, and took effect on April 30, 2012. Among other things, the new rule dramatically reduced the time between the filing of a representation petition and the actual election and significantly limited employer opportunities to challenge important determinations such as supervisor status before an election. . . . . . . Yesterday, Judge Boasberg ruled that the NLRB did not have the requisite quorum when it adopted the new rule and that the new election rule, therefore, is invalid. For the time being, the court held that union elections must take place pursuant to the old rules.

3.   From National Legal and Policy,  Randy Johnson,  a senior vice president with the Chamber of Commerce,  has this to say about these "ambush" elections:

"This rule has no conceivable purpose but to make it easier for unions to win elections.   While couched in technicalities, the purpose of this regulation is to cut off free-speech rights to educate employees about the effects of unionization. The elimination of these rights has long been on the wish list of organized labor, and the Board has dutifully granted that wish today."