Senate Parliamentarian Rejects Dangerous Provision of “Big Beautiful Bill” that Undermines Judicial Protection for Constitutional Rights
In two previous posts, I critiqued a dangerous provision of the Senate version of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill,” which – if enacted – would severely undermine judicial protection against unconstitutional federal government actions (see here and here). In the process, I highlighted critiques by Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick, and a coalition of conservative and libertarian public interest groups, led by the Firearms Policy Coalition. The provision would require litigants seeking preliminary injunctions against illegal federal government actions to post potentially enormous bonds.
Fortunately, the Senate parliamentarian has now ruled that this provision cannot be enacted as part of a reconciliation bill exempt from Senate filibuster rules:
A U.S. Senate official has concluded that a Republican-drafted provision in President Donald Trump’s massive tax and spending bill that would restrict the ability of judges to block government policies violates budgetary rules.
The Senate’s parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, advised over the weekend that the provision ran afoul of a Senate rule governing what can be included in budget reconciliation legislation that can be
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
