The Cordray appointment seems to draw jeers because it was a recess appointment and some people feel that Obama abused his power. I do not believe this is the case. I think when it comes to action, Republicans are trying to block anything Obama does and rather than sitting back and doing nothing, as Jimmy Carter did, Obama takes action.
Yes, I believe that the Cordray Appointment is constitutional, because Cordray is an experienced politicians with a great deal of experience. He will exercise his new position with tact and care. He is a lawyer, so he understands what the law can do and what it cannot do. He will be a thoughtful leader.
The Cordray Appointment is constitutional because it is helping everyday Americans gain consumer protection. Although not everyone likes Cordray's history, especially Republicans, he is highly experienced and helps the checks and balances of government and business swing in the direction of the everyday American. The public will come to know him and like him for this.
The appointment of Richard Cordray to the position of Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is constitutional until a court of law says it isn't. At the moment, this hasn't happened yet, so it remains constitutional. I believe that the heart of the question is actually the constitutionality of the CFPB itself, a matter which remains uncertain while the case (Morgan Drexen vs CFPB) works through the court system.
I believe that the Cordray appointment is constitutional. I do not see any reason why some people would think otherwise. I think that Cordray appointment is fair and just an see nothing wrong with it. I do think that a lot of the criticisms of it are due to political reasons.