Senate Democrats and Republicans proposed legislation to address judge-shopping in federal courts, aiming to prevent litigants from selecting favorable judges. The bills come after a Texas federal court's chief judge faced criticism for not changing case policies. The proposed measures seek to assign major cases randomly to curb judge shopping, which allows litigants to choose judges for preferred outcomes. The move is supported by leaders like Senator Schumer and Professor Judith Resnik, who emphasize the importance of impartiality in judicial proceedings.
“There’s a consensus that you shouldn’t be able to pick the judge who decides your case.” — Professor Judith Resnik explains the push to end judge shopping, via @nytimes. https://t.co/rP5yWlRisk
U.S. Senate leaders introduced legislation to end “judge shopping” — a practice that’s made a federal courthouse in Amarillo with a Trump-appointed judge a destination for conservative litigants challenging Biden administration policies. https://t.co/JLTgfoSk3I
Plaintiffs should not be able to hand-pick individual judges to overturn laws they dislike. @SenSchumer, @SenWhitehouse, and I are leading a bill to codify the Judicial Conference's new policy to curtail judge shopping in our federal courts and assign major cases at random.
The Senate’s top Democrat and top Republican proposed dueling bills to prevent litigants from “judge-shopping” to obtain preferred outcomes in court. https://t.co/3N80Q07voZ
Senate Democrats proposed legislation Wednesday to curb judge-shopping after the chief judge of a Texas federal court under fire for the practice declined to change the court’s case policies. https://t.co/yzVt3D9XXO