Equal access; justice; act; repeal
The bill expresses concerns regarding the liability of the government in litigation costs, which amounted to over $115 million in attorney fee awards in fiscal year 2023. By calling for a repeal or substantial amendments to the EAJA, HCM2013 aims to address perceived loopholes that permit excessive awards, especially for well-funded special interest groups. If the repeal or amendments are enacted, it could significantly alter how lawsuits against the federal government are handled, thus impacting future cases involving individuals and small businesses seeking to assert their rights against federal actions.
HCM2013 is a concurrent memorial introduced by Representative Griffin, urging Congress to repeal or amend the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), which has been in effect since 1980. The EAJA allows certain individuals and entities to recover attorney fees and related expenses after successfully challenging the federal government in litigation or administrative proceedings, given that the government's stance is not substantially justified. Proponents of HCM2013 argue that the Act has been misused by large nonprofit organizations, particularly in environmental disputes, ultimately hindering the management of natural resources and leading to financial burdens on the government in the form of significant fee awards.
The core contention around HCM2013 centers on the balance between protecting individual rights and countering the perceived exploitation of the EAJA by nonprofit groups. Supporters of the bill contend that it is crucial to prevent 'radical ideologies' from using the EAJA to stall development and management of resources in pursuit of litigation. On the contrary, critics could argue that repealing or amending the EAJA could deprive individuals and small entities of a critical tool for contesting unjust government actions, which could lead to potentially unfavorable outcomes for those seeking legal recourse against powerful governmental entities.