Saturday, January 27, 2018
Congress makes procedure
S.1757 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)Building America's Trust ActSponsor: Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX] (Introduced 08/03/2017) Cosponsors: (8)CosponsorsSen. Barrasso, John [R-WY]* 08/03/2017Sen. Johnson, Ron [R-WI]* 08/03/2017Sen. Tillis, Thom [R-NC]* 08/03/2017Sen. Heller, Dean [R-NV]* 08/03/2017Sen. Scott, Tim [R-SC]* 08/03/2017Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK]* 08/03/2017Sen. Wicker, Roger F. [R-MS] 09/18/2017Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK] 10/04/2017SEC. 564. APPROPRIATE REMEDIES FOR IMMIGRATION LITIGATION.(a) Limitation On Class ActionS.—No court may certify a class under rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in any civil action that—(1) is filed after the date of enactment of this Act; and(2) pertains to the administration or enforcement of the immigration laws.
Critics of universal injunctions (myself included) have argued that FRCP 23(b)(2) class actions provide the basis for non-particularized injunctions and offer a reason that courts should not grant non-particularized injunctions in non-class cases. Allowing courts to issue broader injunctions in individual cases undermines 23(b)(2) (which, David Marcus has shown, was enacted precisely to allow broader relief in school-desegregation cases)--if a court can issue a universal injunction as a matter of course, the injunctive class action is superfluous. And having 23(b)(2) suggests that universal injunctions generally should not issue outside of a properly certified class.
This bill (which is unlikely to pass, so it will not matter) would cut-off that option, by limiting all constitutional cases to individual challenges of the plaintiffs before the court and thus individualized injunctions protecting those parties. On the other hand, perhaps it would make the court more likely to issue a universal injunction in individual cases, where the court believes the equities demand broader relief and a class is not an option.