Three House Republicans who defied the mask requirement instituted by former House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) requested the U.S. Supreme Court hear their lawsuit.

Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Ralph Norman of South Carolina sued Pelosi after receiving $500 fines each for entering the House floor without masks.

The lawmakers argue the pay deductions violate the Constitution’s 27th Amendment, “which prohibits salary adjustments for members of Congress from taking effect until after the next election,” according to The Hill.

“When we filed this lawsuit against Pelosi’s mask mandate, I said we would take it to the Supreme Court if necessary, and that is what it has finally come to,” Massie wrote.

After lower courts dismissed the lawsuit, the three House Republicans petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case.

The Hill reports:

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the defendants were all protected by the Constitution’s Speech and Debate Clause, which provides a shield against lawsuits and questioning for things lawmakers say and do as part of their legislative work.

“The D.C. Circuit’s opinion ultimately places no limits on Speech or Debate Immunity,” the Republican lawmakers’ attorneys wrote in their petition to the Supreme Court. “To let the D.C. Circuit’s opinion stand would be to render the Twenty-Seventh Amendment non-justiciable in violation of this Court and the D.C. Circuit’s own precedents and to open the floodgates to unfathomable discipline.”

“The House Rules, under this Doctrine, could impose physical punishment, flogging, or even more medieval forms of punishment, upon members and, under the D.C. Circuit’s precedent, no judicial remedy would be available, the Eighth Amendment notwithstanding,” the petition continued.

House Democrats first established the mask mandate in summer 2020 and later implemented fines for violations. Members were fined $500 for the first mask offense and $2,500 for subsequent offenses.

Massie, Greene and Norman — among the handful of Republicans who were fined for flouting the rule — acknowledged violating the mandate in their petition, which was docketed Monday. The trio are asking the justices to take up their appeal to reverse the immunity ruling and proceed to weigh in on whether their pay deductions were constitutional.

Daily Caller added:

“In addition to concerns about pay increases, the Founders were also greatly concerned that diminishing congressional pay could be used to pressure Members from exercising independent judgment, which could prevent qualified men of modest means from serving in the new national legislature,” the representatives wrote in their petition.

“[F]inancial retaliation against members of Congress is a tool by which Members’ independence can be degraded,” they wrote. “It is crucial that the Twenty-Seventh Amendment be given effect, lest there be another means by which members of Congress are subjected to retaliation for their decision to act in accordance with the desires of their district rather than the desires of the Speaker of the House.”

The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals held in June that the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause makes Pelosi and other named defendants, former House Sergeant at Arms William Walker and House Chief Administrative Officer Catherine Szpindor, immune from the lawsuit.

 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.