H.R. 2274: Court Shopping Deterrence Act

This bill, known as the Court Shopping Deterrence Act, proposes an amendment to U.S. law that would change the process for appealing nationwide injunctions. Specifically, it aims to ensure that when a federal district court issues a nationwide injunction—an order that stops the enforcement of federal laws or regulations across the country—the appeal of that decision must go directly to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Key Provisions

• Nationwide Injunction Definition: A nationwide injunction refers to an order issued by a federal court that restricts a federal statute, regulation, or similar authority against individuals or entities that are not parties to the original case, except when those individuals or entities are represented in some official capacity in accordance with federal civil procedure rules.
• Appeal Process Change: Under the proposed amendment, appeals regarding orders granting nationwide injunctions would bypass lower courts and go straight to the Supreme Court. This is intended to streamline the appeals process for such significant rulings.
• Clerical Amendment: The bill also includes a clerical amendment that updates existing legal documentation to include the new section regarding the appeal of nationwide injunctions.

Rationale

The bill is designed to discourage what some refer to as "court shopping," where parties seek to have their cases heard in certain jurisdictions that they believe will be more favorable to their position. By centralizing appeals of nationwide injunctions at the Supreme Court level, the bill aims to create a more uniform standard and possibly reduce the frequency of such injunctions being issued in an inconsistent manner across different districts.

Potential Implications

If enacted, this legislation could significantly affect the judicial landscape surrounding nationwide injunctions. It may lead to fewer nationwide injunctions being pursued, as parties might anticipate a more challenging appellate process. Additionally, it could impact how lower courts handle cases that might lead to nationwide injunctions, knowing that their decisions could subject them to review by the Supreme Court.

Relevant Companies

• None found