First day of work for our new Congress …
If today was but a taste … ?
I’ve already ordered a case…
This didn’t work when the Supreme Court tried to ban any legal reference to their anointing of the twit in 2000 so why would any sane individual ( of King is not) thinks it will work now?
If Ryan continues to let the Freedumb Caucus to gut the power of the Judiciary, even Alito might rebel? Who needs a Supreme Court when you have state judges that can be bribed a lot easier?
something soothing to wash it down with… 98.6° 
No problem with separation of powers here, nope, none at all.
Good lord (or FSM), Steve King is an idiot.
GOP Purity Fetish #189.28.2
Sounds like a piece of crap, swamp-type legislation, that if signed, would just create more money making opportunities for civil attorneys filing lawsuits against it.
insanity from the gop
Steve King took an oath, he should reread it.
This is insane. How could this go anywhere except to get a few headlines?
Never underestimate the creativity of idiots.
Yeah, I can see the Supreme Court Justices scratching their heads at that one, and asking themselves, “So, if we do cite these cases in any of our future decisions, exactly which court will we be prosecuted in? And what are the sentencing guidlines?”
The bill itself list the names of major lawsuits the Affordable Care Act has faced at the Supreme Court and bars them “from citation for the purpose of precedence in all future cases.”
You and what army, King? Just try and enforce it.
Ask Trump’s SCotUS nominee about this during the confirmation hearings.
looks tasty from here. of course, i like gin.
not very happy headlines. kinda like WTF? headlines.
What does Twitter Boy Trump have to say about this? After all, he’s an expert on Constitutional law, separation of powers, and being a complete fn idiot who makes ridiculous comments regarding things about which he knows absolutely nothing. And by the way, King, the term for citing cases as authoritative rule in subsequent analogous cases or issues is precedents - not precedence, which is to precede or come before, especially in the order of ceremonial preference. Dumbass.
What’s funny is that it is common for lower federal courts to declare that their decisions have no precedential value and should not be cited. Usually the reason is because there is already plenty of case law on the subject and it doesn’t justify publication, or there is something in the case itself that would, in the court’s opinion, throw the established law off somehow (and the judge/court is being a weenie about making any kind of waves or new law). But that’s the federal court regulating itself, and the decisions and opinions are all available online. And, despite being unpublished, if the case is on point, lawyers and other courts can and will cite to it. It is a far different thing for Congress to try to tell the federal courts what US Supreme Court opinions they can and cannot rely upon. Not that Hobby Lobby isn’t a horrible opinion that I would be happy to see disappear.
I think that every time Steve King tweets or does a press release, everyone should just reply with one response, “¿Que?” All evidence suggests that that will always be a valid (and appropriate) query.