WriteYourLaws.com

This is where we, and you, write and advocate the laws that set us free!

RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE FOR CONGRESS TO SET RULES FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS ACT

April 19th, 2025 by Jonathon Moseley

Calendar No. ___ 

119th   CONGRESS

1st SESSION 

H. R. ____

IN THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

To restore the Constitutional mandate invested exclusively in the U.S. Congress to establish and define the powers of inferior Federal Courts, and their structure, and to establish the rules by which they operate and are governed; to restore and promote the proper functioning of the Federal courts, both as to actual justice, fairness, consistency of rules and application of rules, neutrality as to factors unrelated to the law and facts, promote accurate and rational establishment of material facts against arbitrary misrepresentation, reasonable deadlines which are not hostile or themselves unfair to the achievement of justice to parties, prevent arbitrary and inconsistent application of laws and irreconcilable precedents, by rescinding the Rules Enabling Act as an aberration from the mandates of the U.S. Constitution.

April ____, 2025

Sponsor:     with Co-Sponsors:  ,  introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

.Be it hereby enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “RESTORING CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE FOR CONGRESS TO SET RULES FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS ACT.”

SECTION 2. FINDINGS OF CONGRESS

The U.S. Congress finds as material circumstances and facts that:

WHEREAS,  as a Constitutional Republic the United States of America can only be successful as a government of laws and not the arbitrary whim of men, meaning that governing laws and rules must not be a result of manipulation by individual persons or a sham “magic trick” hidden from public view, but must be the result of rational, transparent, reliable, dependable, consistent laws, regulations, rules, and procedures, and 

WHEREAS,  the laws, regulations, rules, and procedures can only be valid if the voters who are “We the People of the United States of America,” can have a voice in the process and, 

WHEREAS, no human system or component of a system no matter how well imagined and designed will always be perfect but actual experience with how these matters function in reality must be considered along with the hopes and aspirations that motivated the current form sometimes (when the problem is serious enough) leading to amendment and development with the goal of achieving greater perfection  and, 

WHEREAS,  the United States of America, after its first unsatisfactory attempt at the Articles of Confederation, divides the totality of the powers and duties of the Federal Government into three co-equal branches, but that division is rough and approximate somewhat similar to like pulling apart cotton candy, such that there are overlaps and tensions, and  difficulties of implementation, and, 

WHEREAS,  there is almost nothing or nothing at all more important to our Constitutional republic than a robust, effective, fair, just, credible, dependable, transparent, trustworthy Judiciary, and, 

WHEREAS,  to seek all of these goals, the U.S. Constitution creates a U.S. Supreme Court (meaning that it is Supreme over the courts, not Supreme over the rest of the country) without any limitation on procedures or rules of decision by which it operates, and, 

WHEREAS,  the Constitution does not create lower Federal courts but invests the power to create some, any, or no “inferior courts” exclusively in the U.S. Congress, which would include the design of the courts such as any specialization, etc. and, 

WHEREAS,  the Constitution does not authorize or empower the U.S. Supreme Court to establish rules, procedures, for the lower Federal courts but invests that power exclusively in the U.S. Congress, and,

WHEREAS,  nevertheless, the Congress has deferred these powers to the U.S. Supreme Court by the Rules Enabling Act under the elusive hopes that the U.S. Supreme Court would create a Judicial Branch that the American voters can have confidence in and believe in, and, 

WHEREAS,  that generous delegation of power from the U.S. Congress to the U.S. Supreme Court has led to disappointment and widespread injustice, and, 

WHEREAS,  the result has included deadlines under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which have become in and of themselves unjust and harmful to many seeking their legal rights in court, and, 

WHEREAS,  the result has included a resistance to changes of venue necessary to give the public confidence in the appearance and the reality of an unbiased judge and juries, which has been one of the many issues causing outrage among the public, and 

WHEREAS,  the result has included a resistance to recusal of judges necessary to give the public confidence in the appearance and the reality of an unbiased judge and broadcasting by a judge’s intense refusal to let another judge free of questions handle the case that the judge obviously is, in fact, biased, and

WHEREAS,  the result has included impaneling a jury with clear and unacceptable biases and likely prejudices (although juries like judges may be appropriate for a different case and may be of good faith and competence and “bias” should be understood as simply meaning that a judge or jury may be right for a different case where their objectivity will not be a doubt in the public’s mind; “bias” being a risk not a derogatory term), and 

WHEREAS,  the result has included illogical, inconsistent, and unconvincing admission of evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence, determining the outcome of trials based more on the whim of judges than on any discernible standard – that is in reality not just in flowery language , and

WHEREAS,  the result has included erratic decisions on the admissibility of evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence for which there is in reality no recourse, and of course the evidence in the record determines the end result, and

WHEREAS,  the result has included inconsistent and illogical decisions about releasing criminal defendants on bail pre-trial, and

WHEREAS,  the result has included unjust and unconvincing decisions on appeal rather than appellate courts providing the opportunity to fully understand the case being appealed by remands to flesh out any facts or arguments not clear, orders for further briefing, inquiries as to the facts, and

WHEREAS,  the result has included in many cases forcing a person to go through an entire trial and the burden and expense before the appeals court will review motions that might have made the trial unnecessary or narrowed its scope, and

WHEREAS,  the result has included the trial judge preventing defendants from calling to the stand witnesses of their choosing, and 

WHEREAS,  the result has included prosecutors withholding exculpatory information from defendants and the Courts, including information that might lead to identifying witnesses, producing an unreliable outcome, and 

WHEREAS,  the result has included the trial judge effectively directing what a criminal Defendant’s defense is allowed to be rather than letting the Defendant present his defense, and

WHEREAS,  the result has included inconsistent rulings on the proper scope of the case, what issues the prosecution can raise in contradiction to whether the defendant can argue defenses, 

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED, that —

SECTION 1.  RULES ENABLING ACT RESCINDED 

  1. The Rules Enabling Act 28 U.S.C. §§ 2071–2077, to be understood not narrowly is hereby rescinded.
  2. This Act especially Section 1 is prospective and not retroactive.
  3. This Act especially Section 1 concerns how the rules and structure of the Federal courts are defined or modified, and therefore this Act has no effect on what rules did govern in past cases.
  4. This Act especially Section 1 does not affect the validity of rules that in the past were established under the Rules Enabling Act.
  5. The effective date of this Act is immediate upon enrollment, presentment, and signature, but nothing in this Act necessarily changes any rule governing the Federal courts.  It changes who shall decide if any future changes are made, in conformity with the U.S. Constitutional mandate.

SECTION 2.  INTERIM PROCESS FOR MODIFICATION OF RULES GOVERNING THE LOWER FEDERAL COURTS

  1. The following process and procedure shall be govern subject to any subsequent legislation that the Congress might adopt.
  2. The Judicial Conference may propose for consideration by the U.S. Congress any modifications of the rules of the lower Federal courts.
  3. Any proposed modification of the rules of the lower Federal courts that is now pending or being worked on shall be treated (when mature) as a proposal for consideration of the U.S. Congress.
  4. Without any prejudice to or limitation on the Federal judiciary engaging in its own internal discussion, receipt of public suggestions and opinions, academic evaluation, making recommendations or the like, the decision-making powers and authority including recommended reforms of the Judicial Conference’s “Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure and Its Advisory Rules Committees,” are hereby transferred to the U.S. House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee.

SECTION 3.  SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

  1. There shall hereby be established a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, U.S. House of Representatives which shall fulfill the functions of proposing, receiving proposals, and deciding upon the addition to, deletion from, or modification of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, Codes of Conduct for United States Judges, Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees, and any other rules governing the lower Federal courts “inferior” to the U.S. Supreme Court.
  2. The Subcommittee shall be named initially on an interim basis “The Subcommittee on the Rules Governing Lower Federal Courts.”
  3. No addition to, deletion from, or modification of the rules governing the Federal courts shall be effective unless voted approved by both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. 
  4. This Section is not intended to interfere with or limit the name used or functions of the Judicial Conference’s consideration of desirable changes to the rules governing Federal courts

SECTION 4.  INTERPRETATION OF THIS ACT

This Act is to be interpreted and applied according to the plain wording used herein.  The Congress explicitly excludes any gloss or spin on these topics rendered by the Federal courts as to any term of art, wording, assumptions, or intentions.  This Act is not adopted as maintaining or continuing past practices, concepts, or interpretation.

ENDORSEMENTS:

BILL STATUS:

COMMENTS: