Current Proposals in Congress to Limit and to Bar Court-Awarded Attorney’s Fees in Public Interest Litigation
One of the long-standing exceptions to the American rule against fee shifting is the authorization of court-awarded fees pursuant to statute. Today, this statutory exception is overwhelmingly the major exception, particularly in the federal arena where nearly 200 federal statutes now authorize courts to award attorneys’ fees.
Although Congress has enacted fee-shifting statutes which apply to various traditional areas of commercial litigation, many of these statutes are either relatively archaic or rarely invoked. More frequently invoked are the fee-shifting statutes applicable to public interest litigation in fields such as environmental law, consumer law, and traditional civil rights law. The decade-old Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 197610 (the “Fees Act”) is unquestionably the most frequently invoked.
Congress enacted the Fees Act to “insure that reasonable fees are awarded to attract competent counsel in cases involving civil and constitutional rights,” and thereby “to promote the enforcement of the Federal civil rights acts.” In so doing, it inadvertently spawned a deluge of ancillary litigation over fees. Whether this increased litigation over fees has been caused either by the breadth of the Fees Act, or by Congress’ provision of standards favorable to prevailing plaintiffs coupled with losing defendants’ unwilling-ness to pay fees to counsel for prevailing plaintiffs, fee litigation has become burdensome for both plaintiffs’ counsel and the courts.
There is a National Emergency at the Southern Border: True or False?
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.
Review of Immigration-Related U.S. Supreme Court Cases: Challenges, Ramifications, and What to Expect
Scholars discuss the most significant immigration-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, their ramifications, and what to expect in 2020.
Mass Violence Motivated by Hate: Are New Domestic Terrorism Laws the Answer?
Do new domestic terrorism laws put Black Lives Matter supporters, anti-war protestors, and/or animal rights activists at risk? Do they presently incorporate sufficient safeguards against such misuse and abuse?
U.S. Elections 2020: Where and How Do We Draw a Constitutionally Permissible Line to a Candidate's Inflammatory Political Rhetoric?
"It's important to note that scholars have long observed that political discourse and political events can contribute to the frequency of bias incidents. In fact, this phenomenon has a name today. It's called the Trump Effect."