Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of MacroBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of MacroBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Personal Finance / Macroeconomic Trends & Risks
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (3) |
Author: OrmontUS   😊 😞
Number: of 4460 
Subject: Big Bueatiful non-financial clause
Date: 06/02/25 1:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 10
The one-sentence provision in the 1,100-page bill prevents federal courts, including the Supreme Court, from enforcing contempt orders unless the plaintiffs have posted a monetary bond, which rarely happens in cases against the government.

"No court of the United States may enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued," the provision says. It applies retroactively.

"Security" refers to monetary bonds that can be used in private litigation when one party seeks to ask a judge to issue an injunction blocking the actions of another party, such as a company trying to prevent a rival from selling a product. If it turns out the injunction is later reversed, the bond helps cover the defendant's losses.

The provision follows a White House memo in March that directed heads of government agencies to request that plaintiffs post a bond if they are seeking an injunction against an agency policy. The Trump administration said the measure would deter frivolous lawsuits.

Of course, with the DOJ in charge of the cops, I'm wondering how the courts would enforce a contempt citation against the a meember of the Executive branch in any case.

Jeff
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to OrmontUS here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 4,454 posts about Macroeconomic Trends & Risks. The article-length ones it recommended most:
AI Tarpits · 36 recs · 2026
End of an era - profit slowdown · 36 recs · 2023
Control Panel: Trend changes in 2026 · 34 recs · 2026
From the Oregon Bay Area (a blogger) · 33 recs · 2025
Lerner Symmetry Theorem · 32 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (3) |


Announcements
Macroeconomic Trends & Risks FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Macro | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community