I 
108TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. R. 3893
To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MARCH 4, 2004
Mr. PAUL (for himself and Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland) introduced the 
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To limit the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, and for other 
purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as ‘‘We the People Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 
The Congress finds the following: 
(1) Article III, section 1 of the Constitution of 
the United States vests the judicial power of the 
United States in ‘‘one Supreme Court, and in such 
inferior Courts as Congress may from time to time 
ordain and establish’’.
(2) Article I, section 8 and article 3, section 1 
of the Constitution of the United States give Con-
gress the power to establish and limit the jurisdic-
tion of the lower Federal courts. 
(3) Article III, section 2 of the Constitution of 
the United States gives Congress the power to make 
‘‘such exceptions, and under such regulations’’ as 
Congress finds necessary to Supreme Court jurisdic-
tion. 
(4) Congress has the authority to make excep-
tions to Supreme Court jurisdiction in the form of 
general rules and based upon policy and constitu-
tional reasons other than the outcomes of a par-
ticular line of cases. (See Federalist No. 81; United 
States v. Klein, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 128 (1872)). 
(5) Congress has constitutional authority to set 
broad limits on the jurisdiction of both the Supreme 
Court and the lower Federal courts in order to cor-
rect abuses of judicial power and continuing viola-
tions of the Constitution of the United States by 
Federal courts. 
(6) Article IV, section 4 of the Constitution of 
the United States guarantees each State a repub-
lican form of government.
(7) Supreme Court and lower Federal court de-
cisions striking down local laws on subjects such as 
religious liberty, sexual orientation, family relations, 
education, and abortion have wrested from State 
and local governments issues reserved to the States 
and the People by the Tenth Amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States. 
(8) The Supreme Court and lower Federal 
courts threaten the republican government of the in-
dividual States by replacing elected government with 
rule by unelected judges. 
(9) Even supporters of liberalized abortion laws 
have admitted that the Supreme Court’s decisions 
overturning the abortion laws of all 50 States are 
constitutionally flawed (e.g. Ely, ‘‘The Wages of 
Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade’’ 82 Yale 
L.J. 920 (1973)). 
(10) Several members of the Supreme Court 
have admitted that the Court’s Establishment 
Clause jurisdiction is indefensible (e.g. Zelamn v. 
Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639, 688 (2002) (Souter, 
J., dissenting); Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors 
of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 861 (1995) 
(Thomas, J. concurring); Lamb’s Chapel v. Center 
Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384, 399,
(1993) (Scalia, J. concurring); and Committee for 
Public Ed. And Religious Liberty v. Regan, 444 
U.S. 646, 671 (1980) (Stevens, J., dissenting). 
(11) Congress has the responsibility to protect 
the republican governments of the States and has 
the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme 
Court and the lower Federal courts over matters 
that are reserved to the States and to the People by 
the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the 
United States. 
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON JURISDICTION. 
The Supreme Court of the United States and each 
Federal court—
(1) shall not adjudicate—
(A) any claim involving the laws, regula-
tions, or policies of any State or unit of local 
government relating to the free exercise or es-
tablishment of religion; 
(B) any claim based upon the right of pri-
vacy, including any such claim related to any 
issue of sexual practices, orientation, or repro-
duction; or 
(C) any claim based upon equal protection 
of the laws to the extent such claim is based
upon the right to marry without regard to sex 
or sexual orientation; and 
(2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involv-
ing any issue referred to in paragraph (1). 
SEC. 4. REGULATION OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION. 
The Supreme Court of the United States and all 
other Federal courts—
(1) are not prevented from determining the con-
stitutionality of any Federal statute or administra-
tive rule or procedure in considering any case arising 
under the Constitution of the United States; and 
(2) shall not issue any order, final judgment, or 
other ruling that appropriates or expends money, 
imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legis-
lative functions or administrative discretion of the 
several States and their subdivisions. 
SEC. 5. JURISDICTIONAL CHALLENGES. 
Any party or intervener in any matter before any 
Federal court, including the Supreme Court, may chal-
lenge the jurisdiction of the court under section 3 or 4 
during any proceeding or appeal relating to that matter. 
SEC. 6. MATERIAL BREACHES OF GOOD BEHAVIOR AND 
REMEDY. 
A violation by a justice or a judge of any of the provi-
sions of section 3 or 4 shall be an impeachable offense,
and a material breach of good behavior subject to removal 
by the President of the United States according to rules 
and procedures established by the Congress. 
SEC. 7. CASES DECIDED UNDER ISSUES REMOVED FROM 
FEDERAL JURISDICTION NO LONGER BIND-
ING PRECEDENT. 
Any decision of a Federal court, to the extent that 
the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal ju-
risdiction under section 3, is not binding precedent on any 
State court.
Æ