[BarbaraLamar]

-sneaky addition to budget bill

Please accept my apologies for the brevity of this post and any typos that are present. I was in an accident and broke my wrist and other bones, and the voice-to-text software I’m using is not perfect.

The article I linked to discusses a provision that was sneaked into the budget bill that was just signed in the House of Representatives. This provision limits the ability of the courts to enforce contempt orders, and it’s retroactive. Given that the courts seem to be the only branch of government standing between a free republic and an authoritarian regime, this is especially disturbing. 

/sb

[DanielSuberviola]

Re: Barbara Lamar’s post 54746 of 5/22/25

Notre Dame law professor Sam Bray (whom I know personally from a couple of decades ago) wrote the following analysis in which he argues that the law is “underinclusive, overinclusive, and likely unconstitutional”:

https://blog.dividedargument.com/p/the-house-judiciary-committee-moves

That said, I completely agree that it is sneaky (though thankfully seems well-reported) and disturbing.

On the subject of contempt, I wonder what it will take for judges to begin holding administration officials in civil and/or criminal contempt. I have read that some judges are considering it, but so far, none have acted to my knowledge. (Since Trump can pardon any criminal contempt, I imagine that only civil contempt would stick.)

/sb

[Author]

Posts