Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill amends 28 U.S.C. §98 to change which Louisiana parishes are in the Middle and Western federal judicial districts. It lists the specific parishes assigned to the Middle District and the Western District.
Progressives worry about enforcement access and jury-pool effects
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that directly replaces parish lists in 28 U.S.C. §98 to redefine district boundaries.
The bill amends 28 U.S.C. §98 to change which Louisiana parishes are in the Middle and Western federal judicial districts.
It lists the specific parishes assigned to the Middle District and the Western District.
The bill states the changes do not apply to cases commenced or pending before enactment.
Content is technical and non-controversial federally, so modestly likely, but local political or judicial stakeholders could delay or alter it.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that directly replaces parish lists in 28 U.S.C. §98 to redefine district boundaries. The core mechanism (textual substitution) is explicit, and a single transitional rule is included. However, the drafting contains an inconsistency between the bill description and the inserted subsections, and the measure omits operational, fiscal, cross-reference, and implementation detail typically expected for a district-boundary redefinition.
Progressives worry about enforcement access and jury-pool effects
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives worry about enforcement access and jury-pool effects
Likely views this as a technical reallocation of parishes that could affect where federal cases are heard.
Support depends on whether the change improves access to courts and preserves civil-rights and environmental enforcement in affected areas.
Treats the bill as an administrative court-mapping change that can be sensible if justified by caseload or population shifts.
Wants clear implementation plans and minimal disruption to ongoing access and costs.
Likely sees this as a legitimate, routine update to federal court geography to improve efficiency and local access.
Prefers local control and efficient federal operations, so supportive if not expanding federal power.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is technical and non-controversial federally, so modestly likely, but local political or judicial stakeholders could delay or alter it.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives worry about enforcement access and jury-pool effects
Content is technical and non-controversial federally, so modestly likely, but local political or judicial stakeholders could delay or alter…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory amendment that directly replaces parish lists in 28 U.S.C. §98 to redefine district boundaries. The core mechanism (textual substitution) is ex…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.