A complaint was filed by three Republican legislators against Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House.

The legal action was over fines levied for breaking the House of Representatives mask mandate in 2021 and was recently submitted to the Supreme Court. The lawsuit is about the sanctions, as The Daily Caller reported.

After receiving a punishment of $500 each for accessing the House floor without masks in violation of a regulation that Pelosi set in 2020, the lawmakers took actions.

The Suit

Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, Majorie Taylor Green of Georgia, and Ralph Norman of South Carolina filed a lawsuit against him.

Through their petition, which was submitted on November 21st, they are requesting that the Supreme Court investigate whether or not the rule breaches the provision of the 27th Amendment.

The law in question request that any changes in remuneration must not take effect until after the next election.

“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 attorneys in our lawsuit against Speaker Pelosi just filed a Petition for Cert at the Supreme Court.

Pelosi imposed salary reductions on me, @RepMTG, and @RepRalphNorman for our refusal to wear a mask in 2021. At issue: is the 27th amdt. to the Constitution even enforceable? pic.twitter.com/4sjiSGPpWN

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) November 28, 2023

Case History

In June, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals held that Pelosi and other named defendants, such as former House Sergeant at Arms William Walker and House Chief Administrative Officer Catherine Szpindor, are not subject to the lawsuit because of the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution.

“[W]e hold the defendants have immunity from suit because the adoption and enforcement of the Resolution were legislative acts within the jurisdiction of the House,” Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, wrote for the majority.

The representatives argued in their appeal to the Supreme Court that if the ruling of the lower court were to be allowed to remain, it would render the 27th Amendment "non-justiciable" and "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,” they argued.