“The Court then turned to the third and final question presented in the case:  whether the Senate can prevent the president from making recess appointments even during its longer recesses by holding “pro forma” sessions – that is, sessions at which no work actually gets done – every three days.  The Court answered that question in the affirmative, rejecting the federal government’s argument that the “pro forma” sessions are, in essence, just a sham to thwart the president’s recess appointments powers.  In the Court’s view, all that matters is whether the Senate says it is in session and could at least in theory  conduct business, which is possible (even if unlikely) at the pro forma sessions.

Here it is important to note that, although all nine Justices agreed that these particular recess appointments were invalid, there was not a lot of harmony on the Court in this question.”

Never a dull moment at SCOTUS. Who says the Law cannot be exciting?

Here’s a link to the decision.

For full details and to see the other remarkable rulings of the week, visit scotusblog.com.