… the Big Ugly Bill is enacted with the following provision, now hidden in the bill:
“No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued….”
Translated: No federal court may enforce a contempt citation.
Actual translation: no court may enforce an injunction or temporary restraining order against the Trump administration.
Now let’s see how the Supreme Court rules.
Jokes aside, I’m guessing 7-2 against
All in favor.
6-3 in favor.
5-4
“Neil drew the short straw, so he gets to be the irrelevant dissenting vote today.”
Translated: No federal court may enforce a contempt citation.
Wrong. Translation is that the courts in general would be essentially a useless advisory board that can be ignored.
Side effect: As written, this would also effectively invalidate restraining orders against domestic abusers, for example. Since no “security” was posted at the time the restraining orders were issued, there’s nothing legally stopping them from contacting their victims again.
Courts NOT being Able to Rule AGAINST the Administration? THATS the Law And Order I WANTED!
-Someone whose FAMILY is in an El Salvadorian Concentration Camp!
The people will find a way to enforce justice under a tyrannical system. If you remove the courts from the list of options, then options like the 2nd Amendment become more likely.
I don’t see anything setting a minimum bond. Who says they can’t post a $1 security bond?
Removed by mod
