The provision would bar courts from enforcing contempt citations for violations of injunctions or temporary restraining orders unless a bond has been paid.
www.newsweek.com
Big Beautiful Bill has provision to prevent courts from enforcing rulings.
"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," the provision in the bill, which is more than 1,000 pages long, says.
The provision "would make most existing injunctions—in antitrust cases, police reform cases, school desegregation cases, and others—unenforceable," Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, told Newsweek. "It serves no purpose but to weaken the power of the federal courts."
The provision would prohibit courts from enforcing contempt citations for violations of injunctions or temporary restraining orders—the main types of rulings that have been used to rein in President Donald Trump's administration—unless the plaintiffs have paid a bond, something that rarely happens when someone sues the government.
If enacted, it would be a "stunning" restriction on the power of federal courts, Chemerinsky wrote in an article for Just Security.
"The Supreme Court has long recognized that the contempt power is integral to the authority of the federal courts," he wrote. "Without the ability to enforce judicial orders, they are rendered mere advisory opinions which parties are free to disregard."
Edit to add.
@CowboyJD is this constitutional? I would think not but haven't been at a Holiday Inn in a long time and could be wrong.