A couple weeks ago, we talked about how the GOP’s Big Beautiful BillTM included a stray attack on preliminary injunctions. Against all odds, the roughly 1,100-page ostensible budget package included a small paragraph refining Rule 65(c) to require anyone seeking to enforce an injunction to put up a bond in the event the federal government eventually wins.
How does one put a dollar value on “maybe don’t disappear innocent people off the street”? Not entirely clear! One could, as one judge told me, order the plaintiffs to put up a peppercorn in the interest of protecting access to justice. The GOP bill tried to turn Rule 65(c) into a mandate but allowed a sliver of wiggle room. That’s been replaced in the new bill.
Anyone trying to preserve their civil rights in the short term will need to scrounge up a few million — because the DOJ will certainly make sure any suit costs that much — just to maintain the status quo while fighting the government.
The only positive to take from this is that we’ve been successful in shining a light on a tiny provision in a massive “TL;DR” bill such that the goons behind it felt the need to edit it. Keep up that pressure!
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter or Bluesky if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
The post Injunction Restriction In Budget Bill Revised… It’s Now Much Worse! appeared first on Above the Law.
