Right-Wing Judges Rage Over Anti-Forum-Shopping Rule Because Hit Dogs Holler
'Whaaaaa! We corrupted the judicial system fair and square!'
(via YouTube)
If there had been any doubt that the Judicial Conference made the right move ordering districts to randomly assign judges to cases seeking national injunctions, the unhinged rage from prominent right-wing judges should clear that right up.
While federal courts randomly assign cases to the judges in the courthouse, in geographically expansive districts with far-flung outposts there might be a single judge in the building, obviating the illusion of randomness. And that presented an opportunity for cynical actors to plop requests to halt the functioning of the entire federal government upon a one-judge courthouse occupied by someone sitting by sole virtue of their MAGA patronage. It’s exactly how mifepristone got banned across the country when activists dropped their lawsuit against the Biden administration in totally logical Amarillo.
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
In the interest of quelling fears of improper forum-shopping, the new rule says that cases seeking national (or statewide) injunctions cannot automatically be assigned to the courthouse where they’re filed, but must be randomly assigned in a process that includes all the judges in the district.
Seems beyond fair. So obviously… GRRRRRRR!
But [Judge Edith] Jones in an email pointed to a federal statute that gives district courts control over the allocation of cases on their dockets.
“Aside from many complications spawned by this new policy, and the fact that complaints started with the patent docket, not about ‘federal’ cases, it appears to conflict with that law,” she said.
[Judge James] Ho said if “reformers are sincerely troubled by venue shopping, they can start by examining the serious concerns that have been voiced about our Nation’s bankruptcy and patent dockets.”
Reform is illegal… also this reform should be about bankruptcy and patent cases? These people can’t complete a sentence without contradicting themselves. But, more importantly, there’s a reason why this rule didn’t reach those other areas and — psst, Jones and Ho, the call is coming from inside your circuit!
Sponsored
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
AI’s Impact On Law Firms Of Every Size
How Transactional Lawyers Can Better Serve (And Maintain) Their Clients
How Transactional Lawyers Can Better Serve (And Maintain) Their Clients
Back in 2022, after the Waco division suffered a deluge of patent litigation, the Western District of Texas issued an order to randomly assign patent cases across the district. Almost as if, in these non-politically charged cases, the local courts can figure out how to deal with forum shopping on their own. And maybe the reason for a national rule stems from the existence of bad faith actors on certain courts.
The sort of bad faith actors who would run around whining about random assignment.
Conservative US judges criticize new rule curbing ‘judge shopping’ [Reuters]
Judge Shopping Policy Selectively Targets Political Lawsuits [Bloomberg Law News]
Earlier: Judicial Conference Shocked SHOCKED To Find Forum Shopping In This Establishment
Sponsored
Law Firms Now Have A Choice In Their Document Comparison Software
Generative AI In Legal Work — What’s Fact And What’s Fiction?
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
