Courts have long been understood to have discretion over whether to order bonds and often do not do so, particularly when the plaintiffs have few resources. But this bill would pressure any people suing the government to put up a bond — and if they can’t afford to, the court couldn’t later use its contempt power to force the government to comply with its orders.

The goal of the provision seems clear: to prevent courts from enforcing their judgments in cases in which there has already been some sort of ruling against the Trump administration.

Because the terms of the provision apply retroactively, it would render the judicial power essentially toothless in many of these cases, including multiple lawsuits challenging the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. It would dangerously curtail judicial authority at a moment when courts are acting as the only meaningful check on the executive branch. If this provision is enacted, courts might be able to work around it by reissuing injunctions with nominal bonds, set as low as $1. Or they might find it altogether unenforceable — an impermissible effort to drastically limit the judicial power.

— Kate Shaw, a contributing Opinion writer and a professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania

The current draft of the Republican tax bill would reduce the federal Medicaid budget by at least $600 billion over a decade. That would be the largest cut the program has faced since its inception.

Administration officials have insisted that the cuts are not cuts but just a reduction in the rate of growth. But at least $600 billion less would leave a big hole in the nation’s health care budget, however you frame it. And no matter who you are or how you get your health care, that hole would certainly include things that you would notice — and miss.