House Republicans smuggled this👇attack on the federal judiciary into their reconciliation bill. Courts rarely require plaintiffs to post security, so this provision, if passed into law, would render a vast number of existing judgments—including Boasberg's contempt order—effectively unenforceable.
Comments
But maybe a judge in an ongoing case could issue a new order, with a security.
Consider the JGG case. Boasberg is still regularly making orders. Could the next one include “defendant shall comply with prior orders x,y,z”
The question is how to measure damages to govt if it is “wrongfully” enjoined.
https://bsky.app/profile/mjsdc.bsky.social/post/3lprpxrt55s2o
Going to continue to act like the orange PoS’s little bitch? For the love of god.
Do we trust Roberts to say this is unconstitutional? Maybe, because it really insults the prerogatives of the judiciary. But it’s a risk and definitely creates more delay.
Can they commence commence criminal proceedings for contempt without enforcing any punishment or issuing any writs to enforce those proceedings surely.
Give these people a criminal record. I'm sure that might effect their security clearance or their status at the bar.
@justsecurity.org had it a few days ago.
https://www.justsecurity.org/113529/terrible-idea-contempt-court/
provide Billionaires with additional tax-breaks.
Good luck sussing that out.
Jesus.
@slotkin.senate.gov
DO NOT PASS THIS!
@dscc.bsky.social
Don't bring a constitution to a fascist street rage.
Is there a minimum threshold amount?
Could Courts just set security at one dollar?
Just use promo code HACK to get 15% off.
Supplies are limited!
#FAFO
Senators go over with a fine toothed comb to locate all tricks they tried to hide
Furthermore, 86 47.
I wanted to say a penny but I seem to recall that those aren't a thing anymore.