NLRB Recess Appointments are Invalid
1 min read
Jan 29, 2013
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is comprised of five members appointed by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate. Traditionally, Presidents have appointed three members from their own political party and two members from the opposition party. The Constitution authorizes the President to make “recess” appointments when the Senate is not in session.
On January 4, 2012, President Obama attempted to make three recess appointments to the NLRB: Democrats Sharon Block and Richard Griffin, and Republican Terrence Flynn. Since that date, the NLRB has issued numerous decisions. One of the employers who was found to have committed an unfair labor practice challenged the validity of the NLRB decision based on the recess appointments.
On January 25, 2013, in Noel Canning Division of Noel Corporation vs. NLRB, No. 12-1115 (D.C. Cir., January 25, 2013), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that President Obama exceeded his authority by trying to make three recess appointments because the Senate was not in recess. Therefore, the NLRB’s unfair labor practice finding against that employer was denied enforcement, and the effect of other NLRB decisions in numerous other cases is now subject to question. The NLRB has stated that it “will continue to perform our statutory duties and issue decisions”.
It is expected that the NLRB will attempt to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, employers are caught in a significant dilemma: should they comply with the many pro-union and pro-employee decisions issued by the NLRB after January 4, 2013? Although one cannot predict if or how the Supreme Court may rule, the most prudent course of action for employers may be to comply with all NLRB decisions until a final determination is made.
Featured Insights

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

In The News
Jul 29, 2026
Hinshaw Authors Contribute Two Articles in Latest Edition of the CCFL Quarterly Report

Webinar
Jul 28, 2026
Cathy Mulrow-Peattie and Sabrina Janeiro Present on Legal AI Technology

In The News
Jul 27, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses How the Insurance Industry Contributed to the 2026 FIFA World Cup

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Jul 27, 2026
Compliance Guidance for the New Vermont Data Privacy and Online Surveillance Act (VDPOSA)

