The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
New York Attorney General Forum Shops Case Against CFPB to Judge Aiken in Eugene Division of District of Oregon
AG James had a 100% chance of drawing a Democratic appointee, and drew a judge that the Ninth Circuit had to repeatedly reverse.
The New York Attorney General field suit against Russ Vought, asserting that he has effectively shuttered the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. Did AG James file suit in Albany? Of course not. There are a few Republican appointed judges there. Did she file in the District of Columbia, where she has a 100% chance of success before the en banc D.C. Circuit? No. Injunctive relief is far too important here. Instead, James chose the District of Oregon. And not in Portland. There are two Republican appointees there (one of whom blocked Trump's military deployment).
Instead, James chose the Eugene Division. I've been to Eugene, Oregon to speak at the University of Oregon. As fate would have it, I visited the city the day after the 2016 presidential election. I felt like I was walking through a wake.
In case you were curious, there are three judges assigned to the Eugene division. Judge Mustafa Kasubhai (Biden nominee), Chief Justice Michael McShane (Obama nominee), and Ann Aiken (Clinton nominee).
And which judge got the case? Judge Aiken! If that names sounds familiar, it should. She presided over the long-running Juliana litigation. A group of children argued that they had standing to challenge energy policy because of alleged effects from climate change. Co-blogger Jon Adler has chronicled Judge Aiken's follies over the years. Indeed, Aiken was reversed by the Ninth Circuit several times.
I don't want to ever hear any complaints over forum shopping, ever again. Liberals engage in forum shopping in Eugene. Conservative engage in forum shopping in Lubbock. Get over it. Fittingly, the University of Oregon is about to play Texas Tech in the College Football Playoffs. Wreck 'Em Raiders.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Or.... and hear me out...all forum shopping is bad and it should be eliminated.
Blackman is counting on that reaction. It can't really be done. On paper we can propose and try some alternatives but (a) Congress is a broken-down, weak, highly-partisan mess that couldn't successfully order pizza together, and (b) there are a lot of very smart people that want very badly to game whatever system is in place. We could probably mitigate it if we had a little political will, but only for a while until it needs attention again.
We might be able to put a lid on judge-shopping, though, because it only works under very specific conditions and currently benefits only the MAGA wing of the Republicans.
Blackman wants you to think picking Kacsmaryk in Lubbock is the same as ordinary forum-shopping. He posts about it a lot because this is important to him and his club. It lets them get away with things they shouldn't. We should fix that, and separately work on mitigating forum-shopping.
Let's not forget that Blackman expressly defended the Kacsmaryk situation; he said it was a feature, not a bug, that the guy was in a single judge division, so that the GOP could judge shop if it wanted.
As I have repeatedly propose here, there should be national courts composed of three judges, appointed at random from across the country, to hear challenges to governmental policies.
Hmmm...
Why, may I ask? With varying levels of justification, forum shopping occurs all over the country. Egregiously unjustified examples happen, regardless of political leaning, on both sides, all over the country. This case may be one of those examples, but I'm far less interested in Josh's completely predictable judgement than I would be if he had included shortcomings of the relevant "standings" arguments.
I'm also interested a little, but not much (because we already know), why Josh didn't seem to notice the the suit was filed by...
Each State's Attorney General is on the signature page.
For accuracy, let me slightly edit Josh's upteenth repetition of his tiresomely repeated whine:
...
Can't wait to hear Josh's comeback to you
That is an unprecedented level of hackery even for Blackman.
Who gives a shit? That's just a list of states with Democrat governors. They still could have filed in any of the others.
The complaint lists five different attorneys for the State of Oregon and lists the Oregon Department of Justice in the footer of every page. It’s almost like it was filed by the Oregon Department of Justice. I wonder why the Oregon Department of Justice would file suit in Oregon…
That's a pretty big "oops," Josh. When can we expect your apology? Or at least an acknowledgement?