As President-elect Donald Trump rolls out his controversial Cabinet picks, he has demanded the Republican-led Senate take extended breaks to allow him to make recess appointments rather than subject his nominees to an extensive public vetting process and upper chamber approval.
Trump’s demand not only tests congressional Republicans’ willingness to uphold checks and balances over bending to the president-elect’s wishes but, if met, would be an affront to the Constitution, which empowers the Senate to provide “advice and consent” over the president’s key executive branch nominees, experts told Salon.
“It’s certainly one of the biggest attempts at a power grab that we’ve seen. He wants not to just recess appointment, he wants to basically do an end-around around the Senate’s role in advice and consent,” said Josh Huder, a senior fellow of the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University.
Such an action would “undermine” Congress‘ power of personnel and its ability to shape the federal government and the Judiciary, he said in a phone interview. “It would be something that would be unprecedented in American history — there’s no question.”
Since winning the presidency earlier this month, Trump has picked potential Cabinet members at a lightning quick pace, raising the question of whether he could bypass Congress to install his selections. His nominees, a swath of loyalists with contentious positions, have drawn widespread pushback — even from Republican elected officials.
Chief among the president-elect’s controversial picks is former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who was nominated for attorney general despite being investigated by the Justice Department and the House Ethics Committee over allegations that he paid to have sex with a 17-year-old girl, which he denies.
Trump also chose former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head the Department of Health and Human Services, and ex-Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, to oversee the nation’s intelligence services. Many in the medical community have harangued Kennedy Jr.’s appointment over his outspoken criticism and skepticism of vaccines, while national security experts have sounded alarms over Gabbard’s ties to Russia and Syria.
Though they could receive Senate backing from a traditional confirmation process, the GOP’s narrow 53-seat majority does not guarantee it, especially as some senators question the choices.
David Alvis, a professor of political science at Wofford College in South Carolina, told Salon that making recess appointments offers the incoming Trump administration a “stronger hand” over the appointees than the confirmation process typically affords.
By circumventing Senate confirmation, “you’re not having to negotiate the terms of the appointee. You don’t have to come up with deals or bargaining with members of the Senate — especially Senate holdouts — so that gives you greater strength over it,” he said in a phone interview. The recess appointment concluding at the end of the legislative session creates a “threat of non-renewal of that appointment” that “allows the executive a little bit more control over the recess appointee.”
Trump’s push for recess appointments ahead of his second term could “easily” be anticipated based on “maneuverings toward” this action in the later years of his first term, Alvis argued.
Trump made a quick appointment of then-Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, who the Senate had already confirmed for that role, to acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in late 2017 to avoid a confirmation process for a different nominee. He also threatened to invoke his constitutional power to adjourn Congress to push through nominees while lawmakers were out of Washington, D.C., during the early months of the pandemic.
More than 1,000 executive branch roles are subject to Senate approval in addition to the Cabinet positions, according to The Washington Post. The Constitution authorizes the president to fill vacancies if Congress is in recess, and presidents of both major parties have done so. Strict rules and procedures over both recessing and making recess appointments have made outfitting a Cabinet with such picks a challenge.
Trump’s push for recess appointments ahead of his second term could “easily” be anticipated based on “maneuverings toward” this action in the later years of his first term, Alvis argued.
Trump made a quick appointment of then-Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, who the Senate had already confirmed for that role, to acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in late 2017 to avoid a confirmation process for a different nominee. He also threatened to invoke his constitutional power to adjourn Congress to push through nominees while lawmakers were out of Washington, D.C., during the early months of the pandemic.
More than 1,000 executive branch roles are subject to Senate approval in addition to the Cabinet positions, according to The Washington Post. The Constitution authorizes the president to fill vacancies if Congress is in recess, and presidents of both major parties have done so. Strict rules and procedures over both recessing and making recess appointments have made outfitting a Cabinet with such picks a challenge.
Senate Democrats could also slow down a vote to adjourn by objecting to ending the session and upending the typical unanimous vote sought for such decisions. While this would require overcoming a 60-vote threshold, Huder says stalling the process could run the risk of “[slowing] the institution to a crawl” and giving the majority greater incentive to “go nuclear” on majority votes.
“It’s one of those situations where, if the minority goes too far in gumming up the works, the majority will have incentives to press their prerogatives and do things by majority vote,” he said. “That hasn’t been done in history yet, but obviously we’re getting to some territory in the not too distant past where majorities have been considering these types of things.”
The other avenue left open to Trump — though historically unprecedented — would be to attempt to instruct Congress to recess in order to install his nominees without their approval. The Constitution empowers the president to adjourn Congress if the chambers can’t agree on the timing of a recess.
Senate Democrats could also slow down a vote to adjourn by objecting to ending the session and upending the typical unanimous vote sought for such decisions. While this would require overcoming a 60-vote threshold, Huder says stalling the process could run the risk of “[slowing] the institution to a crawl” and giving the majority greater incentive to “go nuclear” on majority votes.
“It’s one of those situations where, if the minority goes too far in gumming up the works, the majority will have incentives to press their prerogatives and do things by majority vote,” he said. “That hasn’t been done in history yet, but obviously we’re getting to some territory in the not too distant past where majorities have been considering these types of things.”
The other avenue left open to Trump — though historically unprecedented — would be to attempt to instruct Congress to recess in order to install his nominees without their approval. The Constitution empowers the president to adjourn Congress if the chambers can’t agree on the timing of a recess.
“I’m hesitant to give up any aspect of our role when it comes to advice and consent. That’s what we do,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who has signaled her opposition to Gaetz’s nomination, told the Post.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told the outlet that he believed Trump is within his constitutional authority to make recess appointments, adding that it could push Republican leadership to confirm nominees quickly and send a message to Democrats should they seek to interfere with Trump’s nominees.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., on Sunday also left open the possibility of adjourning Congress to allow Trump to appoint his Cabinet nominees outside of the confirmation process, depending on how the Senate moves.
In the grand scheme, Huder said, Congress will have to play a role in whether Trump can circumvent the Senate. The upper chamber’s advice and consent role extends back to the framing of the Constitution and is “at the core of the constitutional construct.”
“When you look at the Constitution, it’s really Congress’s Constitution,” he said, noting the legislative body is empowered with “the most power and the most authority.”
“You can’t just prorogue Congress like the king could prorogue Parliament back in the day,” he added. “You can’t just get rid of them. It requires their consent at some level.”
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy