Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill adds section 1414 to title 28, U.S. Code, barring civil actions that seek orders enforceable in every U.S. district and division (nationwide injunctions) from being brought in divisions that have only a single active judge assigned.
Such actions must be filed only in divisions of judicial districts that have two or more active judges.
The statutory change targets the venue and eligibility for issuing nationwide injunctions from single-judge divisions.
Technocratic, low-cost change with partisan implications for judicial practice; plausible House traction but substantial Senate/filibuster and litigation risks lower final odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive amendment to Title 28 that sets a clear, narrow rule limiting venue for lawsuits seeking orders enforceable nationwide. It materially changes jurisdictional practice but does so with minimal statutory scaffolding.
Progressive fears reduced nationwide protections and delays
Progressive fears reduced nationwide protections and delays
Likely skeptical or wary.
The persona will view the bill as a procedural limit that could slow or complicate urgent nationwide relief, especially for civil rights and regulatory challenges.
They may acknowledge reduced single-judge forum-shopping but worry about practical harms to affected people.
Cautiously supportive of reforming procedures that permit single judges to bind the whole country, while wanting clear rules and safeguards.
The persona will prioritize predictable, administrable standards and worry about unintended access or timing consequences.
Likely supportive.
The persona will view the bill as a check on judicial overreach and a way to stop plaintiffs from shopping for a lone favorable judge to impose nationwide policy.
They will emphasize separation of powers and consistent national administration.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic, low-cost change with partisan implications for judicial practice; plausible House traction but substantial Senate/filibuster and litigation risks lower final odds.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressive fears reduced nationwide protections and delays
Technocratic, low-cost change with partisan implications for judicial practice; plausible House traction but substantial Senate/filibuster…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise substantive amendment to Title 28 that sets a clear, narrow rule limiting venue for lawsuits seeking orders enforceable nationwide. It materially changes…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.