HR2274-119

In Committee

Court Shopping Deterrence Act

119th Congress Introduced Mar 21, 2025

Summary

What This Bill Does

The Court Shopping Deterrence Act adds a new 28 U.S.C. section 2285. When a federal district court grants a nationwide injunction, the appeal from that order lies directly to the Supreme Court. The bill defines a nationwide injunction as a federal court order that purports to restrain enforcement of a federal statute, regulation, order, or similar authority against a nonparty, unless the nonparty is represented by a party acting in a representative capacity under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The practical effect is to bypass the regional courts of appeals for these injunctions and put the Supreme Court in direct control of appellate review.

Who Benefits and How

Federal agencies benefit because nationwide injunctions against federal statutes or regulations would receive immediate Supreme Court appellate review. Federal defendants benefit from a faster route to the Supreme Court when a single district court blocks federal policy for nonparties. Supreme Court clerks benefit institutionally from direct jurisdiction over a high-stakes injunction category. Opponents of forum shopping benefit if litigants have less incentive to seek nationwide relief from a favorable district court.

Who Bears the Burden and How

Plaintiffs seeking nationwide injunctions face direct Supreme Court review rather than ordinary regional appellate review. Regional appellate courts lose initial appellate jurisdiction over covered nationwide injunction orders. Supreme Court justices and clerks face additional direct appeals from district court injunction orders. District court litigants must assess whether requested relief reaches nonparties and triggers the new appeal route.

Key Provisions

  • Creates a direct Supreme Court appeal path for orders granting nationwide injunctions.
  • Defines nationwide injunctions by whether they restrain federal authority against nonparties.
  • Excludes nonparties represented through a proper representative capacity under civil procedure rules.
  • Amends the chapter 155 table of sections to add section 2285.

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Routes appeals from district court orders granting nationwide injunctions directly to the Supreme Court and defines nationwide injunctions as orders restraining enforcement of federal authority against nonparties not represented in a proper representative capacity.

Key Policy Areas

Courts, Administrative Law, Federal Litigation

Primary Purpose

Routes appeals from district court orders granting nationwide injunctions directly to the Supreme Court and defines nationwide injunctions as orders restraining enforcement of federal authority against nonparties not represented in a proper representative capacity.

Policy Domains

Courts Administrative Law Federal Litigation

Resolution provisions

Identified Gains
  • Federal agencies
  • Federal defendants
  • Supreme Court clerks
  • Opponents of forum shopping
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
Federal agencies: ,
Federal defendants: ,
Supreme Court clerks: ,
Opponents of forum shopping: ,
Identified Costs
  • Plaintiffs seeking nationwide injunctions
  • Regional appellate courts
  • Supreme Court justices
  • District court litigants
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: ih
Supreme Court justices: ,
District court litigants: ,
Regional appellate courts: ,
Plaintiffs seeking nationwide injunctions: ,

Legislative Progress

In Committee
Introduced Committee Passed
Mar 21, 2025

Mr. Rose introduced the following bill; which was referred to …

Mar 21, 2025

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Mar 21, 2025

Introduced in House

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Judiciary
6 mentions across 2 clauses
-2 negative ?4 uncertain

Regional appellate courts, Supreme Court clerks, Supreme Court justices

Government
4 mentions across 2 clauses
+4 positive

Federal agencies, Federal defendants

Professional Services
2 mentions across 2 clauses
-2 negative

Plaintiffs seeking nationwide injunctions

2/3
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
Courts Administrative Law Federal Litigation

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology