Posted on 02/28/2024 2:40:44 AM PST by Libloather
A Lubbock, Texas federal judge ruled Tuesday that lawmakers unconstitutionally passed the $1.7 trillion government funding bill in 2022 when they did so under a pandemic-era rule allowing members of the U.S. House of Representatives to vote on the matter by proxy instead of in person.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, requested the courts to block a provision of the funding bill that gave pregnant workers stronger legal protections.
U.S. District Judge Wesley Hendrix reviewed the request and gave a "limited" ruling on one of two provisions Paxton sought to have blocked.
Hendrix, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, ruled that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act was wrongfully passed, blocking the law from being enforced against the state as an employer.
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which was enacted in December 2022, requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for pregnant workers.
In his ruling, Hendrix noted that his injunction is only applicable to state government employees.
Paxton filed a lawsuit last year, arguing the federal spending package was unconstitutionally passed because over half of the House of Representatives were not physically present to provide a quorum, yet they still voted by proxy.
In May 2020, then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, helped get a rule in place allowing lawmakers to vote by proxy, in response to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
When Republicans took control of the House in 2022, they ditched the proxy rule after challenging it in court unsuccessfully.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Ah!
But which court, and which judge? This appears to matter greatly in our phony, cr@p third world banana republic "justice" system.
In this case, James Wesley Hendrix is a Trump judge.
So, can we garnish the paychecks of Congress for the next million years?
“You want the federals govt to define reasonable? and redefine it and.”
I have been a businessman and employer all my life. And some addictions absolutely need a forced intervention or they kill innocent souls.
The most deadly of those addictions is radical extremist greed to the point of killing human beings like flies.
So what’s the penalty for these criminal filth?
“But which court, and which judge?”
Judge Dredd.
Close enough in principal to make my argument.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.