LegisTrack
Back to all bills
HR 3454119th CongressIntroduced

Protecting Our Constitution and Communities Act

Introduced: May 15, 2025
Economy & Taxes
Standard Summary
Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

This bill, titled the Protecting Our Constitution and Communities Act, would add a new private right of action to the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. It allows individuals, as well as states and local governments, to sue the United States and federal employees in federal district court when budget authority that Congress has required to be made available is withheld. The bill provides for injunctive relief and monetary damages (including compensatory, punitive, and attorney fees), with potential treble damages for bad-faith violations, and it imposes personal liability on federal employees for knowing violations. It also expands who can be held liable, clarifies the definition of “contingencies,” strengthens enforcement and oversight via the Comptroller General (GAO), and makes certain budgetary actions subject to judicial review. In short, it creates a private, court-based remedy to enforce compliance with the Act’s rules on spending and budget authority. The measure emphasizes that Congress controls the purse and that the President may not unilaterally withhold or derail funds appropriated by Congress. It establishes new process for review (including jusiticiability and severability), defines who counts as a federal employee for purposes of liability, and extends the Act’s oversight with GAO deference and requirement for access to records. The overall aim is to deter improper budget withholding and ensure accountability when budgeting and spending laws are not followed.

Key Points

  • 1Private right of action created (Title XI): Individuals or state/local governments can sue the United States and federal employees in federal court for withholding budget authority required by the Act, seeking preventive relief (injunctions, orders) and damages.
  • 2Damages and remedies: Plaintiffs can obtain compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, and costs. Damages can be trebled for bad-faith violations; federal employees can be personally liable for damages; immunity defenses are expressly waived in these actions.
  • 3Expanded scope for States and localities: States, counties, cities, districts, tribal governments, and other local entities (and their departments/agencies) can bring similar actions and seek damages for violations.
  • 4Definitions and who is liable: The bill defines “federal employee” to include political appointees and certain special government employees; clarifies who may be personally liable for damages.
  • 5Enforcement and oversight enhancements: The Comptroller General (GAO) would have a deference-based role in interpreting the Act; the Executive Branch must provide timely access to records; failures to comply would be reported to Congress for action.
  • 6Justiciability and severability: The bill explicitly states that budgetary withholding constitutes final agency action reviewable in court, and it preserves the ability to sever invalid provisions from the Act if some parts are struck down.
  • 7Contingencies defined: The bill adds a formal definition of “contingencies” as unforeseen, urgent needs requiring immediate but temporary budget adjustments, within statutory/constitutional limits.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- Individuals and private entities harmed by improper withholding or non-obligation of budget authority: they gain a new civil remedy, including damages and attorney fees.- States and local governments: new ability to sue for violations affecting budget authority, potentially increasing leverage to obtain compliance or remedies.Secondary group/area affected- Federal employees and agencies involved in budgetary withholding: new potential for personal liability and treble damages in cases of bad faith.- The executive branch and the budgeting process: potential increase in litigation risk and a stronger incentive to comply with congressional appropriations and impoundment rules; GAO and oversight functions gain greater prominence.Additional impacts- Legal and constitutional implications: reinforces a stricter interpretation of Congress’s power over the purse and limits unilateral presidential authority to withhold or defund appropriations.- Administrative process: GAO’s role would be more influential due to deference in legal interpretation; agencies may need to increase transparency and record-keeping to defend or justify budgetary actions.- Potential litigation landscape: the private right of action could lead to increased court challenges over impoundment or deferral decisions, affecting how budget authority is managed and reported.
Generated by gpt-5-nano on Oct 3, 2025