The Battle Against Judge-Shopping: US District Court’s Stand on Assignment Policy

TFD – Delve into the complex world of legal strategy as the US District Court in the Northern District of Texas makes a crucial decision regarding the assignment policy amid concerns of judge-shopping. Explore the implications of this move and gain insights into the dynamics of judge selection in high-stakes legal cases. Follow the evolving landscape of legal procedures and policy-making in the US judiciary with our comprehensive coverage.

A federal trial court in Texas that is frequently chosen by litigants to ensure that a conservative judge would hear their case is rejecting the US judiciary’s policy-making body’s attempt to curtail the practice, which is referred to as “judge-shopping.”

Chief Judge David Godbey recently sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York, informing him that the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas has opted not to approve a proposal that would change the way cases having statewide or nationwide ramifications are assigned.

The tactic known as “judge-shopping” involves purposefully bringing legal matters before courts where the parties believe the judges will be favorable to their position. In Texas, where there are multiple separate courthouses, or “divisions,” and just one or two judges hear every case filed there, it has become more common in recent years.

Currently, any case filed in the Amarillo Division of the US District Court in Northern Texas is automatically assigned to Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a former president Donald Trump appointee who has emerged as a go-to judge for parties bringing legal challenges to President Joe Biden’s policies.

The FDA’s approval of pharmaceutical abortion pills would have been suspended by Kacsmaryk’s order, which also prevented other Biden administration attempts.

George W. Bush appointee Godbey wrote a letter on March 29 in response to Schumer’s request that his court adopt a new case assignment plan that was suggested by the Judicial Conference, the federal judiciary’s policy-making body. Even if a complaint was filed in a division with a single judge, the conference proposed last month that any lawsuit seeking a countrywide or statewide order be randomly assigned among a pool of judges throughout the district.

“The consensus was not to make any change to our case assignment process at this time,” Godbey wrote after the district’s trial judges convened last week to review case assignments.

The first to report on Godbey’s letter to Schumer was Law360.

The judges in Texas’ northern district “have decided to continue to allow the odious practice of judge shopping,” according to a statement released by Schumer on Monday.

Schumer stated, “The Senate will take into consideration legislative options that end this misguided practice.”

In addition to Amarillo, Texas is home to several US district courts with single-judge divisions where opposition to the Biden administration’s agenda is regularly directed.

Although some of those courts had previously changed their case assignment procedures for patent disputes after judge-shopping tactics in those cases attracted attention, the chief judges of those districts have not responded to questions CNN submitted to their chambers regarding any changes to their case assignment policies.

Following a meeting in early March, the Judicial Conference said that the new case assignment procedure aimed to prevent judge-shopping. Republican senators, led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, reacted negatively to the statement, claiming that any mandatory policy would violate a law approved by Congress that grants each district court the authority to create its own procedures for assigning cases.

A few days later, the Judicial Conference published the official guidelines, which said that the district-wide assignment policy was suggested but not required.