There is still much discourse about Donald Trump bypassing the Senate confirmation process via recess appointments. And I still don't get it. Neither house can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other, and the Supreme Court says you need to be adjourned at least ten days for it to count as a recess. So Senate and House would both have to agree to adjourn for three weeks or so.
Or, according to the latest cockamamie theory, they could agree to disagree. Instead of agreeing to adjournment, they'll deliberately disagree and then Trump will use his Article II power to step in and adjourn Congress himself.
This is starting to sound like a conservative version of the trillion-dollar coin. If both Houses are planning to cave to Trump, why would they concoct a weird plan to disagree instead of just adjourning? That doesn't make sense.
Bottom line: This can only happen if both houses agree to adjourn for a considerable time right at the beginning of the session. What are the odds of that?
And anyway, this only matters with a nominee that the Senate doesn't want to confirm. But if they're willing to defy Trump by not confirming, why would they then cave to Trump and go into recess so he can do it himself? And if they aren't willing to do that, would the House really be willing to provoke the Senate by adjourning on its own and causing a constitutional crisis?
And would the Supreme Court allow such an obviously bogus use of the recess appointment power? Even the court's conservatives haven't been very open to that kind of thing.
Unless I hear something that makes sense—even by the loose standards of Donald Trump—I'm sticking to my guns on this. The Senate goes into session on January 3 and the first recess doesn't come until August. End of story.