WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate leaders are weighing in on the debate over “judge shopping” when litigants take their cases to courthouses where judges are likely to look more favorably at their claims. One federal court in Texas that’s been commonly used by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said it will not adopt a new policy aimed at curtailing the controversial practice.

What You Need To Know

  • The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has become a common destination for Attorney General Ken Paxton to bring cases against the Biden administration and get a favorable ruling and critics have accused him of judge shopping

  • The Judicial Conference, which serves as the federal courts’ policymaking body, recently adopted new guidelines that aims to crack down on the practice and promote random case assignment 

  • In a letter to Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Chief U.S. District Judge David Godbey of the Northern District of Texas indicated it will not follow them, at least at this time

  • While Schumer introduced legislation to codify the Judicial Conference's new rules, Sen. Min. Leader Mitch McConnell filed his own legislation to restrict the authority of a single district court judge to block federal policy all across the country

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has become a common destination for Paxton to bring cases against the Biden administration and get a favorable ruling. Critics have accused him of judge shopping. The Judicial Conference, which serves as the federal courts’ policymaking body, recently adopted new guidelines that aims to crack down on the practice.

But in a letter to Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Chief U.S. District Judge David Godbey of the Northern District of Texas indicated it will not follow them, at least at this time. 

Some legal experts said that not carrying out the new guidance completely would be unprecedented.

“I’m not aware of any other context in which district courts actively refused to adopt these types of policies, because it’s their self-governing process,” Amanda Shanor, an assistant professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, said. “It’s uncommon to see that there will be resistance.”

The letter prompted Schumer to introduce legislation this month to codify the Judicial Conference’s new policy into federal law. The rule would promote the random assignment of civil cases that affect a whole state or the entire country.

Schumer specifically called out one judge in the Northern District of Texas, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk. The Trump appointee issued an unprecedented ruling last year that overturned the decades-old federal approval of the medication abortion drug, mifepristone.

“If courts like the Northern District of Texas refuse to adopt common sense reforms to limit judge shopping, Congress should consider legislation to end this dangerous practice and restore trust in our federal judiciary,” Schumer said on the Senate floor.  

Some Republicans on Capitol Hill said to do so would overstep Congress’ authority and argued Republican-appointed justices are being unfairly scrutinized for a practice used by all kinds of interest groups, including some Democratic attorneys general.

“Our founders deliberately designed a system of checks and balances to prevent any one branch from forcing the other two to bend to its will, but that’s exactly what our Democratic colleagues are trying to do, and it’s wrong, it’s unconstitutional, and it must be stopped,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, on the floor. 

While Sen. Min. Leader Mitch McConnell swiftly condemned the Judicial Conference’s new rules, the Republican leader introduced his own legislation to restrict the authority of a single district court judge to block federal policy all across the country.

“I think it’s meant to sort of give an alternate idea,” Shanor said. “It’s an acknowledgment that there’s at least that there’s a problem with some nationwide injunctions that are coming in certain context or that there’s some concern about that.”