SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK

Court rebukes Obama on recess appointments WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that President Barack Obama acted illegally when he made recess appointments to a key government agency, a decision that appears to block any president's ability to get around political gridlock in Washington by making appointments without congressional approval. The court's unanimous decision last Thursday was the first case involving the U.S. Constitution's recess appointments clause, and the nine justices held that Obama's appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in 2012 without Senate confirmation were illegal. Obama had invoked the Constitution's provision giving the president the power to make temporary appointments when the Senate was in recess. The court held, however, that the Senate was not formally in recess because it was briefly opened for business, for minutes only, every three days. The court said the Senate was only in recess if it was closed for 10 or more days. Obama had argued that the Senate was on an extended holiday break and that those brief sessions every third day were a sham intended to prevent him from filling seats on the NLRB. But the court, in a companion 5-4 decision, rejected a lower court's ruling that would have made it virtually impossible for a president to fill vacancies when the Senate is not transacting business. Recess appointments are good for only two years, making them a temporary tactic for a president who is unable to win Senate approval for his personnel decisions. The issue of recess appointments receded in importance after the Senate's Democratic majority changed the rules to make it harder for Republicans to block confirmation of most Obama appointees. But the ruling's impact may be keenly felt by the White House next year if Republicans capture control of the Senate in the November election. The potential importance of the ruling lies in the Senate's ability to block the confirmation of judges and the leaders of independent agencies like the NLRB. A federal law gives the president the power to appoint acting heads of Cabinet-level departments to keep the government running. The lower court ruling that was rejected by the Supreme Court had held that the only recess recognized by the Constitution was the once-a-year break between sessions of Congress. It also said that only vacancies that arise during that recess could be filled. So the high court has left open the possibility that a president, with a compliant Congress, could make recess appointments in the future. Recess appointees who subsequently won Senate confirmation include Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice William Brennan, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and two current NLRB members. Former UN Ambassador John Bolton is among recess appointees who left office because they subsequently could not win a Senate vote. -------- Associated Press writers Steven R. Hurst and Mark Sherman contributed to this report. Justices voidabortion clinic protest-free zone By Mark Sherman Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court unanimously struck down the 35-foot protest-free zone outside abortion clinics in Massachusetts last Thursday, declaring it an unconstitutional restraint on the free-speech rights of protesters. Authorities have less intrusive ways to deal with potential confrontations or other problems that can arise outside clinics, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. Roberts noted that most of the problems reported by police and the clinics in Massachusetts occurred outside a single Planned Parenthood facility in Boston, and only on Saturdays when the largest crowds typically gather. "For a problem shown to arise only once a week in one city at one clinic, creating 35-foot buffer zones at every clinic across the Commonwealth is hardly a narrowly tailored solution," Roberts said. He wrote the majority opinion after asking no questions - exceedingly rare for him - at the argument in January. Roberts noted that no other state has a similar law and that he is aware of only five cities that have created fixed buffer zones around abortion clinics: Burlington, Vermont; Pittsburgh; Portland, Maine, and San Francisco and Santa Barbara in California. The ruling also left intact a high court decision from 2000 that upheld a floating buffer zone in Colorado. While the court was unanimous in the overall outcome, Roberts joined with the four liberal justices to strike down the buffer zone on narrower grounds than the other, more conservative justices wanted. In a separate opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia criticized Roberts' opinion as carrying forward "this court's practice of giving abortion-rights advocates a pass when it comes to suppressing the free-speech rights of their opponents." Scalia said state and local governments around the country would continue to be able to "restrict antiabortion speech without fear of rigorous constitutional review." Joined by Justices Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, Scalia dissented from the Colorado decision and said last Thursday he would have overturned it. Still, abortion rights advocates lamented the new ruling and said it compromised the safety of women seeking abortions. "This decision shows a troubling level of disregard for American women, who should be able to make carefully considered, private medical decisions without running a gantlet of harassing and threatening protesters," said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Reaction to the buffer-zone ruling was predictably mixed. Mark Rienzi, who represented the protesters, said, "The government cannot reserve its public sidewalks for Planned Parenthood, as if their message is the only one women should be allowed to hear. Today's decision confirms that the First Amendment is for everyone, and that the government cannot silence peaceful speakers." Massachusetts officials who backed the buffer zone said they would try to re-craft the law to address the high court's concerns. "The fight is just beginning again," said state Attorney General Martha Coakley, whose office had argued before the justices. Roberts suggested that Massachusetts could enact a state version of the federal law that prohibits people from blocking abortion clinic entrances. The buffer-zone case began when Boston-area grandmother Eleanor McCullen and other abortion opponents sued over the limits on their activities at Planned Parenthood health centers in Boston, Springfield and Worcester. At the latter two sites, the protesters say they have little chance of reaching patients arriving by car because they must stay 35 feet not from the clinic entrances but from the driveway to those buildings' parking lots. Patients enter the building through the parking lots, which are private property. Planned Parenthood provides health exams for women, cancer screenings, tests for sexually transmitted diseases, birth control and abortions at its clinics. The organization said that the buffer zone has significantly reduced the harassment of patients and clinic employees. Before the 35-foot zone went into effect in 2007, protesters had been able to stand next to the entrances and force patients to squeeze by, Planned Parenthood said. Before 2007, a floating buffer zone kept protesters from approaching unwilling listeners any closer than 6 feet if they were within 18 feet of the clinic. The floating zone was modeled after a Colorado law that the Supreme Court has upheld. That decision was not called into question in Thursday's ruling. Clinic officials said they are most concerned about safety because of past incidents of violence. In 1994, a gunman killed two receptionists and wounded five employees and volunteers at a Planned Parenthood facility and another abortion clinic in nearby Brookline. The most recent killing was in 2009, when Dr. George Tiller, who performed abortions, was shot in a church in Wichita, Kansas. Abortion protesters said that other state and federal laws already protect health center workers and patients, as well as access to clinics. -------- Associated Press writer Bob Salsberg contributed to this report from Boston. Published: Mon, Jun 30, 2014