Legis Daily

Affirming the obligation of the President of the United States to comply with court orders.

USA119th CongressHRES-188| House 
| Updated: 3/4/2025
Kevin Mullin

Kevin Mullin

Democratic Representative

California

Cosponsors (25)
Nikema Williams (Democratic)Robin L. Kelly (Democratic)Raúl M. Grijalva (Democratic)Darren Soto (Democratic)J. Luis Correa (Democratic)Eric Swalwell (Democratic)Dina Titus (Democratic)Andrea Salinas (Democratic)Delia C. Ramirez (Democratic)Shri Thanedar (Democratic)Ro Khanna (Democratic)Al Green (Democratic)LaMonica McIver (Democratic)Betty McCollum (Democratic)Eleanor Holmes Norton (Democratic)Bonnie Watson Coleman (Democratic)Norma J. Torres (Democratic)Jim Costa (Democratic)James P. McGovern (Democratic)Yvette D. Clarke (Democratic)Bennie G. Thompson (Democratic)Zoe Lofgren (Democratic)Nanette Diaz Barragán (Democratic)Valerie P. Foushee (Democratic)Rashida Tlaib (Democratic)

Judiciary Committee

  • Introduced
  • In Committee
  • On Floor
  • Passed Chamber
  • Enacted
This resolution affirms the fundamental obligation of the President of the United States to comply with judicial court orders. It highlights a series of recent federal court decisions in early 2025, including temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, issued against President Donald J. Trump and his administration. These orders addressed actions such as attempts to deny citizenship to individuals born in the United States, pause federal funding, and grant unauthorized access to Treasury Department records. The resolution also notes public statements by the President and Vice President that questioned judicial authority and suggested non-compliance with these rulings. Citing established legal precedents like *Marbury v. Madison*, the resolution underscores the judiciary's role in interpreting the law and the constitutional requirement for all persons, including the President, to abide by court orders. It asserts that defying court orders jeopardizes the rule of law and the separation of powers. Therefore, the House of Representatives calls on President Trump and his administration to immediately comply with all existing and future court decisions, affirming the judiciary's authority to use all available tools to enforce its orders .
View Full Text

Suggested Questions

Get AI-generated questions to help you understand this bill better

Timeline
Mar 4, 2025
Submitted in House
Mar 4, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  • March 4, 2025
    Submitted in House


  • March 4, 2025
    Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Government Operations and Politics

Affirming the obligation of the President of the United States to comply with court orders.

USA119th CongressHRES-188| House 
| Updated: 3/4/2025
This resolution affirms the fundamental obligation of the President of the United States to comply with judicial court orders. It highlights a series of recent federal court decisions in early 2025, including temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions, issued against President Donald J. Trump and his administration. These orders addressed actions such as attempts to deny citizenship to individuals born in the United States, pause federal funding, and grant unauthorized access to Treasury Department records. The resolution also notes public statements by the President and Vice President that questioned judicial authority and suggested non-compliance with these rulings. Citing established legal precedents like *Marbury v. Madison*, the resolution underscores the judiciary's role in interpreting the law and the constitutional requirement for all persons, including the President, to abide by court orders. It asserts that defying court orders jeopardizes the rule of law and the separation of powers. Therefore, the House of Representatives calls on President Trump and his administration to immediately comply with all existing and future court decisions, affirming the judiciary's authority to use all available tools to enforce its orders .
View Full Text

Suggested Questions

Get AI-generated questions to help you understand this bill better

Timeline
Mar 4, 2025
Submitted in House
Mar 4, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  • March 4, 2025
    Submitted in House


  • March 4, 2025
    Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Kevin Mullin

Kevin Mullin

Democratic Representative

California

Cosponsors (25)
Nikema Williams (Democratic)Robin L. Kelly (Democratic)Raúl M. Grijalva (Democratic)Darren Soto (Democratic)J. Luis Correa (Democratic)Eric Swalwell (Democratic)Dina Titus (Democratic)Andrea Salinas (Democratic)Delia C. Ramirez (Democratic)Shri Thanedar (Democratic)Ro Khanna (Democratic)Al Green (Democratic)LaMonica McIver (Democratic)Betty McCollum (Democratic)Eleanor Holmes Norton (Democratic)Bonnie Watson Coleman (Democratic)Norma J. Torres (Democratic)Jim Costa (Democratic)James P. McGovern (Democratic)Yvette D. Clarke (Democratic)Bennie G. Thompson (Democratic)Zoe Lofgren (Democratic)Nanette Diaz Barragán (Democratic)Valerie P. Foushee (Democratic)Rashida Tlaib (Democratic)

Judiciary Committee

Government Operations and Politics

  • Introduced
  • In Committee
  • On Floor
  • Passed Chamber
  • Enacted