this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
84 points (98.8% liked)

BrainWorms

1584 readers
22 users here now

Hey, welcome to BrainWorms.

This is a place where I post interesting things that I find and cant categorize into one of the main subs I follow. Enjoy a front seat as i descend into madness

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/5013999

Don't worry, Steiner will make sure it won't pass in the Senate. maybe-later-honey

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

On a lot of these anti-Trump injunctions, you're starting to see a security bond of $1, exactly because of this.

If the one sentence is the entire statutory language, I don't see anything that removes the judge's existing discretion to require a nominal token bond.

[–] clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't understand. What does the token bond amount do?

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It seems that an injunction with a token bond attached would still be enforceable under the proposed law.

There doesn't seem to be anything in the provision that requires the security bond to be substantial.