Speaker Pelosi’s Legacy Dealt Massive Blow

Federal Judge Rules House of Representatives Acted Unconstitutionally in Passing $1.7 Trillion Federal Budget.

A Major Blow

via PBS

Recently, a federal judge in Texas delivered a significant ruling, declaring that the U.S. House of Representatives violated the Constitution when it employed proxy voting to pass a major spending bill in December 2022. This ruling has sparked intense debates and raised questions about the constitutional implications of proxy voting and its impact on legislative procedures and decision-making.

Constitution violation

via FOX

The judge said Speaker Nancy Pelosi violated the Constitution by allowing members to vote without being physically present. State Attorney General Paxton wrote in a press release, “Congress acted egregiously by passing the largest spending bill in U.S. history with fewer than half the members of the House bothering to do their jobs, show up, and vote in person. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi abused proxy voting under the pretext of COVID-19 to pass this law, then Biden signed it, knowing they violated the Constitution. This was a stunning violation of the rule of law. I am relieved the Court upheld the Constitution.”

Proxy voting

via C-SPAN

In a decisive ruling, U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix determined that the House’s use of proxy voting during the passage of the $1.7 trillion federal budget in 2022 violated the Constitution’s Quorum Clause. This clause mandates a physical quorum of members to conduct legislative business, a requirement that was allegedly not met due to the use of proxy voting.

validity of votes

via PBS

The ruling has implications for the validity of votes cast during that period and has opened the door to potential legal challenges to pandemic-era legislation, particularly the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) included in the omnibus spending bill.

Physically present

via MSNBC

“For over 235 years, Congress understood the Constitution’s Quorum Clause to require a majority of members of the House or Senate to be physically present to constitute the necessary quorum to pass legislation,” wrote AG Paxton. “This rule prevents a minority of members from passing legislation that affects the entire nation. But despite the Constitution’s text and centuries of consistent practice, the House in 2020 created a rule that permitted non-present members to be included in the quorum count and vote by proxy.”

New law included

via ABC

“Pursuant to that novel rule, the House passed a new law included within the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, and that particular provision affects Texas,” explained Paxton.

Unconstitutional

via MSNBC

The controversy surrounding proxy voting stems from its implementation by House Democrats amid the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, allowing the House to pass legislation without a physical quorum of members present. This mechanism counted virtually present or proxy-voting members toward a quorum, a practice that has now been deemed unconstitutional. The ruling has prompted reflections on the impact of proxy voting on legislative procedures and the constitutional framework governing congressional decision-making.

Judge’s ruling

via CBS News

The federal judge’s ruling has raised questions about the constitutionality of legislative actions carried out in the absence of a physical quorum, particularly during extraordinary circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pivotal moment

via C-SPAN

The decision’s potential legal ramifications and its implications for legislation passed during the period of proxy voting have drawn attention to the intersection of legal interpretations and congressional procedures, signaling a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over the use of proxy voting in legislative processes.

Heightened scrutiny

via CBS News

Following the ruling, the House’s use of proxy voting has come under heightened scrutiny, prompting discussions about the necessity of upholding constitutional requirements for quorum and the implications for legislative decision-making.

Potential impact

via C-SPAN

The ruling’s potential impact on future legislative practices and the need for adherence to constitutional mandates in congressional proceedings remain topics of significant interest as the legal and political ramifications of the decision continue to unfold.

$1.7 trillion

via PBS

The federal judge’s ruling on the unconstitutionality of the House of Representatives’ use of proxy voting during the passage of a $1.7 trillion federal budget in December 2022 has ignited debates and raised questions about the constitutional implications of legislative procedures and decision-making. As discussions evolve, it becomes imperative to consider the broader legal and political ramifications of the ruling and its potential impact on future congressional practices.