Progressive Lawyers Engage Actual Judge Shopping in Alabama


According to what I’ve heard, the Judicial Conference policy is almost dead. What a mistake it was. The judges chose to focus on a controversial issue, rather than areas of bipartisan agreement, such as bankruptcy reform and patent reform. I worry that the water has been poisoned to allow for a wide-ranging reform. I’ll be sharing some thoughts about how things can be improved in due course.

Let’s start with some highlights The following is a list of the most recent and current members of the Judge shopping in Alabama Judge shopping in Alabama did not take place in divisions with a single judge. Alabama has a very small number of district court judges appointed by Democrats. According to my rough estimate, in the whole state, there’s only one active Obama nominee and two senior appointees who came from Clinton and Carter. Judge Myron Thomas, an appointee of Carter in Montgomery (Middle District of Alabama), a well-known progressive litigant, is a Carter appointee. If you’re a progressive litigant, you’ll do whatever you can to get your case assigned Judge Thompson.

We now come to the current case. Alabama passed the Vulnerable Children Compassion and Protect Act in 2022, which prohibited certain medical procedures on minors. All the usual suspects immediately challenged the law.

Their strategy was revealed in a panel reportThe strikingness of. Here is a (rough) chronology.

  1. 4/8/2022—Ladinsky complaint filed in NDAL by National Center for Lesbian Rights, GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Human Rights Campaign.
  2. 4/11/2022—The NDAL case was randomly assigned to Judge Annemarie Axon (Trump appointee).
  3. 4/11/2022—Walker cACLU, Lambda Legal and Transgender Law Center filed a complaint in MDAL. The civil coversheet marked the case related to Corbitt v. TaylorCorbitt A challenge was filed against a policy in Alabama regarding the listing gender on driver’s licenses. The case was closed by January 2021. The only remaining issue was attorney fees. Judge Thompson presided Corbitt. The attorneys “marked Walker Related to Corbitt Because they wanted Walker Judge Thompson.” The attorneys admitted that they “considered Judge Thompson a favorably drawn judge because of his management of the case.” Corbitt “He ruled in favor the plaintiffs who asserted rights for transgender people.”
  4. 4/12/2022 – WalkeChief Judge Emily Marks, a Trump appointee, is randomly assigned. Walker Plaintiffs filed an application to reassign the case to Judge Thompson. Counsel had also called the chambers of Judge Thompson and spoken with the judge’s clerk to flag up the pending motion for a preliminary injunction. At that time Walker The case had not been assigned Judge Thompson. The lawyer initially denied making the call, but later admitted that he had. The panel found his testimony “troubling.” The counsel never called Chief Justice Marks to flag a pending motion.
  5. 4/13/2022—Chief Judge Marks entered an order to show cause why the case should not be transferred to the Northern District. The parties did no oppose the transfer.
  6. 4/15/2022 – Walker Judge Burke was randomly assigned the case, who is a Trump appointee. The same day, Judge Axon transferred. Ladinsky Judge Burke. About two hours after Ladinsky Judge Burke was assigned the Walker You can also find out more about the following: Ladinsky Plaintiffs filed notices of voluntary dismissal. This dismissal was made “even though” [counsel] “They admitted that time was of the essence, and their stated goal to move quickly was to enjoin a law they viewed unconstitutional. This abruptly stopped their pursuit of emergency aid.”
  7. 4/16/2022—Counsel for Ladinksy Plaintiffs told the press they planned to refile their case immediately.
  8. 4/18/2022—Judge Burke denied the TRO as moot because of voluntary dismissal, but noted the press reports that the Plaintiffs planned to refile. Judge Burke stated that, “At risk of stating what is obvious, [p]laintiffs’ course of conduct could give the appearance of judge shopping—’a particularly pernicious form of forum shopping’—a practice that has the propensity to create the appearance of impropriety in the judicial system.”
  9. 4/19/2022—A new group of plaintiffs, led by Eknes-TuckerIn the Middle District of Alabama, the same attorneys who filed the original lawsuit filed the suit. Ladinsky. The lawyers sought out new plaintiffs for fear of being accused of judge-shopping if they brought a second action with the original plaintiffs.  The case was assigned at random to Judge Huffaker, a Trump appointee.
  10. 4/20/2022—Judge Huffaker transferred the case to Judge Burke.

The panel concluded: “Behind-the-scenes, counsel took secretive steps calculated to steer Walker Judge Thompson before filing their motion Walker He was reassigned.” The lawyers “made plans and tried to manipulate the assignment” of these cases. The panel noted how Judge Burke ruled against the appellants. Eknes-Tucker Plaintiffs in Part A Trump judge!

This sequence of events in Alabama shows how pernicious the terrorists are The following is a list of the most recent and current members of the Judge shopping is. This practice has become increasingly popular. Nothing It has to do only with divisions of a single judge. Skilled attorneys know how to direct cases in a favorable direction. Here, the lawyers made some ill advised statements to press and were caught. But in many cases they are not caught. I’ll wait to see social media erupt in rage about this The following is a list of the most recent and current members of the Judge shopping If ADF did this, they would be crucified.

How would the much-vaunted Judicial Conference here have worked? Who knows? The random draw resulted in so many assignments, reassignments and lawsuits filed in different divisions. Plaintiffs deliberately chose these choices to clog the system. The “Related” case and coversheet gambits can throw any assignment into disarray. Staff in the clerk’s offices often have to decide if they should reassign “related” cases. This case involved “two” cases [that were] There are no restrictions on filing in the same district. [was] It is a question of whether they should be consolidated, or transferred in some other way so that the same Judge preside over them.” This issue is resolved “not as much by rule as by practice.” It is a complex matter that requires some judgment. It would not surprise me if judges in the trenches looked at the Judicial Conference’s policy and recognized that it would be impossible to actually apply in the real world–especially in light of Potential gamesmanship. Parties can trigger reassignment simply by requesting statewide assistance. Or, the plaintiffs could dismiss a case and refile it, as they did in this case. The same complaint can be filed multiple times in different districts with the hope of getting the best drawing.

The attorneys involved in the Alabama case are from leading law firms and civil right organizations. They have every reason to avoid random draws. Red is a color that can be used to indicate a number of things.. I suspect, for these reasons, that they would silently oppose the policy of judicial conference.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *