Originally Posted by AustinChief
And this is the problem. Recess appointments are not MEANT to be used as leverage over the Senate. PERIOD. It is clear in the Constitution what the framers meant and I doubt the Supreme Court will go against the Constitution on this.
It's not at all beyond the scope of what the framers intended.
The framers intended there to be a measure when (a.) appointments needed to be made (b.) for quite some time and (c.) the Senate wasn't in session.
This fits all three of those conditions. The fact that it's an elongated debate causing this vacancy, or the intrasingence of a minority, is immaterial.
Edit: At the time the Constitution was written, they also did not intend for there to be 1,400 positions that the Senate would demand to be approved. Things change, conditions evolve, and that's why the Constitution was written so vaguely and is considered a living document.