I
104TH CONGRESS
2D SESSION
H. R. 3100
To limit the authority of Federal courts to fashion remedies that require
local jurisdictions to assess, levy, or collect taxes, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 14, 1996
Mr. MANZULLO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To limit the authority of Federal courts to fashion remedies
that require local jurisdictions to assess, levy, or collect
taxes, 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 the ‘‘Judicial Mandate and
Remedy Clarification Act of 1996.’’
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
The Congress finds that—
(1) a variety of effective and appropriate judi-
cial remedies are available for the full redress of
legal and constitutional violations under existing law,
HR 3100 IH
and the imposition, increase, levying or assessment
of taxes by courts is neither necessary nor appro-
priate for the full and effective exercise of remedies
imposed pursuant to Federal courts jurisdiction;
(2) the imposition, increase, levying, or assess-
ment of taxes by judicial order is not an appropriate
exercise of the judicial power under the Constitution,
and is incompatible with the traditional principles of
American law and government and the basic Amer-
ican principle that taxation without representation is
tyranny because Federal courts are unelected offi-
cials, not answerable to the popular will;
(3) Federal courts exceed the proper boundaries
of their limited jurisdiction and authority under the
Constitution, and impermissibly intrude on the legis-
lative function in a democratic system of govern-
ment, when they issue orders requiring or resulting
in the imposition, increase, levying, or assessment of
new taxes or existing taxes;
(4) no court should enter an order, not should
there be any settlement, remedying a legal or con-
stitutional violation, by imposing, creating, increas-
ing, levying, or assessing any tax for the enforce-
ment thereof, nor can the court enter an order, nor
can there be any settlement, which has the effect of
HR 3100 IH
imposing, creating, increasing, levying, or assessing
any tax;
(5) settlement agreements or orders entered by
Federal courts should be fashioned within the frame-
work of current budgetary restraints of any State or
political subdivisions thereof;
(6) the Congress retains the authority under ar-
ticle III, sections 1 and 2, or the Constitution to
limit and regulate the jurisdiction of the inferior
Federal courts, and such authority includes the
power to limit the remedial authority of such courts;
(7) nothing contained herein shall otherwise
validate, approve, legalize, or encourage the imposi-
tion of a tax, levy, or assessment by a Federal judge;
(8) notwithstanding these findings, the Con-
gress acknowledges that in certain circumstances,
the Federal courts have abrogated constitutional au-
thority with regard to judicially mandating a tax,
levy or assessment to ascertain a remedy, but that
should the Federal courts continue on in such a
manner, the following rules shall be met prior to en-
tering any order or settlement remedying a Federal
or State common law, statutory or constitutional vio-
lation by imposing, creating, increasing, levying or
assessing any tax for the enforcement thereof; nor
HR 3100 IH
shall there by any settlement or order which has the
effect of imposing, creating, increasing, levying or
assessing any tax:
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON FEDERAL COURT REMEDIES.
Section 1343 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended—
(1) by redesignating subsection (b) as sub-
section (c); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (a) the follow-
ing new subsection:
‘‘(b)(1) Notwithstanding any other law, there shall be
no settlement nor shall the district courts order any State,
or political subdivision of a State, to impose, increase,
levy, or assess any tax; nor shall there be any settlement
or order which has the effect of imposing, creating, in-
creasing, levying or assessing any tax, for the purpose of
enforcing any Federal or State common law, statutory, or
constitutional right or law unless the court finds by clear
and convincing evidence, that—
‘‘(A) there are no other means available to rem-
edy the deprivation of rights or laws, and the pro-
posed imposition, increase, levying, or assessment is
narrowly tailored to remedy the specific deprivation
at issue;
HR 3100 IH
‘‘(B) the tax will not contribute to or exacer-
bate the deprivation intended to be remedied;
‘‘(C) the proposed tax will not result in a loss
of revenue for the political subdivision in which it is
assessed, levied, or collected;
‘‘(D) the proposed tax will not result in the loss
or depreciation of property values of the taxpayer so
affected;
‘‘(E) the proposed tax will not conflict with the
applicable laws with respect to the maximum rate of
taxation as determined by the appropriate political
subdivisions, and will not exceed the lower of ei-
ther—
‘‘(i) the proposed taxation rate; or
‘‘(ii) the total of aggregate taxes that may
be imposed—including taxes of other State and
local units of governmental bodies and for the
purposes of implementing such order may not
exceed the Cost of Living as measured by Sec-
tion 215(i) of the Social Security Act, plus five
percent per annum; and,
‘‘(F) plans submitted by State and local au-
thorities will not effectively redress the deprivations
at issue.
HR 3100 IH
‘‘(2) A finding under paragraph (1) shall be subject
to immediate interlocutory de novo review and shall be re-
viewed at least annually.
‘‘(3) Notwithstanding any law or rule of procedure,
any aggrieved person, corporation, or unincorporated asso-
ciation residing or present in the political subdivision in
which a tax is imposed under this subsection shall have
the right to intervene in any proceeding concerning the
tax. Such interveners shall have the right to present evi-
dence and appear before the court to present oral and
written testimony, and to appeal any finding required to
be made by this action, or any other action taken to im-
pose, increase, or levy, or assess taxes to remedy depriva-
tions of Federal or State rights.
‘‘(4) These findings by a district court as aforesaid
shall apply to those situations wherein parties enter into
an agreement with or without court approval and notwith-
standing the fact that litigation has not commenced.
‘‘(c) TERMINATION.—Notwithstanding any law or
rule of procedure, any imposition, increase, levy, or assess-
ment of a tax shall—
‘‘(1) automatically terminate or expire after 1
year, from the date of the imposition or from the
date of the enactment of this statute upon which the
HR 3100 IH
court shall make the findings required by subsection
(b); and
‘‘(2) terminate at any time if the court deter-
mines that the deprivation rights has been cured to
the extent practicable.
‘‘(d) STATE PRE-EMPTION.—Notwithstanding any
law or rule of procedure, this statute does not pre-empt
State or political subdivision from imposing such and fur-
ther restrictions on the use of State and local taxes, levies,
or assessments for the purposes set forth herein.
‘‘(e) STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL RIGHTS.—
Nothing contained herein shall allow a Federal court to
use a tax of any kind of a State or political subdivision
for the purpose of funding such order, except to the ex-
tent, if any, and to the proportion, if any, that such taxes,
levies, or assessments may already be used for the funding
of the object of the order as allowed by State or political
subdivision law. Furthermore, the Federal court has no
jurisdiction to force, mandate, or compel a taxing body
of a State or political subdivision to change or modify its
tax laws so as to enlarge them to pay for an order by
the Federal court.
‘‘(f) FINDINGS.—Finding required to be made by this
section shall be completed by the court prior to the begin-
ning of the fiscal year for the political subdivision against
HR 3100 IH
which a tax imposition, increase, levying, or assessment
is ordered, and shall be transmitted to such political sub-
division.
‘‘(g) RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—There is a pre-
sumption that the imposition, increase, levying, or assess-
ment of taxes is not a narrowly tailored means of remedy-
ing deprivations of Federal or State rights.’’
In the event the Supreme Court finds that the use
of a judicial tax, levy, or assessment by a Federal judge
is illegal or unconstitutional, nothing contained herein
shall be construed to otherwise make legal, validate, or ap-
prove of a judicial tax, levy, or assessment.
Æ