The Byrd Rule is intended to keep reconciliation bills focused on budgetary matters. Any provision that does not produce a change in federal spending or revenues, or is merely incidental to the budgetary components, would likely violate the Byrd Rule. A measure to suppress the courts seems primarily aimed at changing policy rather than impacting the federal budget directly. As such, it risks being deemed extraneous under the Byrd Rule tests and could be struck from the reconciliation bill through a point of order. To uphold the integrity of the reconciliation process and ensure it remains centered on fiscal issues as intended, I would urge you to oppose the inclusion of any provisions suppressing the judiciary in the budget reconciliation bill. Those matters are better addressed through regular order legislation subject to a higher vote threshold, rather than via the expedited reconciliation track designed for deficit-reducing policies. Keeping reconciliation narrowly focused on budgetary changes aligns with the rule's purpose.
Sign Petition
