U.S. Senate leaders, including Senators Schumer and Whitehouse, have introduced legislation to combat 'judge shopping' in federal courts. The bill aims to randomize the assignment of major cases, preventing litigants from choosing favorable judges. This move is in response to concerns about biased outcomes and the influence of judge selection on court decisions.
Senate leaders unveiled dueling proposals to limit judge shopping, sparking optimism that Congress will rein in plaintiffs' ability to bring cases before judges they think will be friendly to their views, while raising questions about feasibility. https://t.co/IOWo5lw2yx https://t.co/rwIjgPnYPz
“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
We’ve changed the role of judges https://t.co/nn3UUkgPEu
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/53vRK7SQWs
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.