Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT Opinion from Stephen I. Vladeck: Don't Let Republican 'Judge Shoppers' Thwart the Will of Voters
For the 26th time in two years, the Texas attorney general Ken Paxton recently filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging a Biden administration policy. The suit, which seeks to wipe out a new Labor Department rule about the investment of pension trust assets, wasnt filed in Austin, the state capital, or in Dallas, where the Labor Departments regional offices are, or anywhere else with a logical connection to the dispute.
It was filed in Amarillo. Why Amarillo? By filing there, Mr. Paxton had a 100 percent chance of having the case assigned to Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2019 and a former deputy general counsel to the First Liberty Institute, which frequently litigates religious liberty cases before the Supreme Court.
Forum shopping has long been a problem in civil litigation. Clever lawyers use procedural rules to file in courts deemed most likely to be sympathetic to their claims. But what Mr. Paxton and other plaintiffs are doing is something far more nefarious theyre engaging in a novel and specific form of judge shopping, seeking out the specific judge whom they wish to hear their case, presumably because of how they expect that judge to rule.
By taking advantage of a loophole in federal procedure, these plaintiffs are able to rely on a small handful of district judges appointed by Mr. Trump to thwart major features of President Bidens agenda. The tactic upends the tradition of random assignment of judges and raises serious questions about the fairness and impartiality of the judicial system. And it can and should be easily fixed, whether by the courts themselves or, failing that, by Congress...
It was filed in Amarillo. Why Amarillo? By filing there, Mr. Paxton had a 100 percent chance of having the case assigned to Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2019 and a former deputy general counsel to the First Liberty Institute, which frequently litigates religious liberty cases before the Supreme Court.
Forum shopping has long been a problem in civil litigation. Clever lawyers use procedural rules to file in courts deemed most likely to be sympathetic to their claims. But what Mr. Paxton and other plaintiffs are doing is something far more nefarious theyre engaging in a novel and specific form of judge shopping, seeking out the specific judge whom they wish to hear their case, presumably because of how they expect that judge to rule.
By taking advantage of a loophole in federal procedure, these plaintiffs are able to rely on a small handful of district judges appointed by Mr. Trump to thwart major features of President Bidens agenda. The tactic upends the tradition of random assignment of judges and raises serious questions about the fairness and impartiality of the judicial system. And it can and should be easily fixed, whether by the courts themselves or, failing that, by Congress...
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/05/opinion/republicans-judges-biden.html
archive link: https://archive.ph/dWuq6
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1604 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (45)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT Opinion from Stephen I. Vladeck: Don't Let Republican 'Judge Shoppers' Thwart the Will of Voters (Original Post)
blogslug
Feb 2023
OP
Lovie777
(12,329 posts)1. Majority of the people vote in favor or against in an issue in individual states .....
but the GQP counter just because it wasn't what they wanted, going against the majority. That is not freedom, that is not the 1st Amendment, that is not Democracy.
mopinko
(70,221 posts)2. and they put those lunatics in those seats for that purpose.
its an order of magnitude worse. goes much deeper.
plus they gin up cases specifically to run them up to scotus. this idea we have that this shit bubbles up on its own is, well, quaint.
u think its an accident that the worst judge in the country sits over palm beach?
Historic NY
(37,453 posts)3. An indicted attorney general no less,