New Demand Justice Brief Urges Congress To Stop Judge-Shopping From Undermining The Courts 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

OCTOBER 24, 2024

CONTACT: [email protected]

Washington, DC–Today Demand Justice released a new brief highlighting the dangers of judge-shopping, a practice that allows plaintiffs to essentially choose which judge will hear their case by filing in specific geographic locations. The brief calls on Congress to step in and reform this practice, which prevents the federal courts from delivering equal justice for all Americans.

As the brief notes, “When combined with ideological judges being more willing to grant broad nationwide injunctive relief, judge-shopping threatens the fairness that federal courts must provide. A recent poll shows that 88 percent of Americans across the political spectrum believe judges should be randomly assigned to cases to prevent plaintiffs from handpicking judges for a favorable verdict.” 

“The right-wing legal movement has turned to judge-shopping to advance unpopular and often dangerous policies through the courts,” said Demand Justice Counsel and Senior Director of Engagement Jen Ahearn. “Judge-shopping is antithetical to the foundations of our democracy and threatens the legitimacy of our courts–this is not how the justice system is meant to function and the American people do not want it to be misused in this way.” 

The full text of the brief can be found here

# # #