Shloke Singh Nair
93 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 159
Judge shopping, which is distinct from forum shopping, refers to the practice of plaintiffs strategically filing lawsuits in jurisdictions where they have a high probability of drawing a judge who will be favorable to them. Over the past few years, judge shopping has increasingly come under scrutiny, particularly where plaintiff states like Texas have employed the practice in lawsuits against the federal government with high success rates. In response, the Department of Justice undertook a new strategy to combat judge shopping by filing motions to transfer venue away from the judge-shopped federal district courts in which it was sued. Texas federal judges, however, have largely been unreceptive to these motions to transfer, thereby allowing the effects of judge shopping to stand and causing a need for reform.
To solve this problem, this Note proposes amending the general federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e), to require actions initiated by plaintiff states against the federal government to be filed in their respective state capitals unless a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in a different judicial district in the state, thereby making it a more appropriate venue. Relatedly, this Note also suggests modification of the Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert public interest factor analysis for motions to transfer, including according strong weight to the interest of justice as a separate, explicit factor supporting transfer in judge-shopped cases, as well as establishing a presumption in favor of transfer when equitable relief is sought on a nationwide basis.
