Supreme Court Expressed Skepticism Regarding Validity of President Obama’s NLRB Recess Appointments

During Monday’s oral arguments of the closely watched case NLRB v. Noel Canning, several members of the Supreme Court – including those considered the most liberal – took issue with the government’s legal justifications in support of President Obama’s January 4, 2012 recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board.  On January 25, 2013, the D.C. Circuit held in Noel Canning that the appointments of former members Sharon Block, Terence Flynn, and Richard Griffin to the Board while the Senate was holding pro forma sessions were unconstitutional.  While it is always difficult to read the tea leaves during a Supreme Court argument, it appears that there is a good chance that the Court will uphold Noel Canning, placing hundreds of Board decisions in legal limbo. Continue reading this entry at Littler's Labor Relations Counsel.

Information contained in this publication is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or opinion, nor is it a substitute for the professional judgment of an attorney.