Section 70302 of the “One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act” would severely restrict federal courts’ authority to hold government officials in contempt if they violate judicial orders.
The reconciliation bill would require anyone suing the government to pay a bond before the court can use its contempt power to enforce injunctions or restraining orders meant to halt illegal actions.
By restricting this authority, the House bill threatens the power of the judicial branch. On its own, that represents an attack on the rule of law and the separation of powers that underlies our democracy. But in the context of our current political moment, a more specific goal is unfortunately clear.
Courts have already ruled at least 170 times against the Trump administration, including a preliminary injunction that halted Trump’s unconstitutional attempt to change the rules for federal elections. In response to many of these rulings, the president has resisted compliance and waged intimidation campaigns targeting the judges responsible.
In light of all this, the House bill seems squarely and unacceptably focused on shielding the Trump administration from accountability when it breaks the law.
To make matters worse, the new rule would be so broad that it could allow any government actor to escape being held accountable for violating court rulings. It would also apply to court orders and injunctions issued before the law takes effect. This would render thousands of prior orders across the country immediately unenforceable through contempt proceedings, no matter how the public has already relied on them.
This provision cannot be allowed to stand.
No government official, including the president, should be able to simply ignore court rulings that find their actions illegal or unconstitutional. The rule of law and our democracy itself depend on it.