Sponsors (2)
The bill reduces the power of single district judges to issue sweeping nationwide injunctions and curbs forum-shopping by moving major executive-action challenges to randomized, Chief Justice-designated three-judge panels, but it also adds administrative complexity, potential delays to emergency relief, and procedural rigidity that increase cost and burden on courts and litigants.
People across the country (including federal employees and states) are less likely to have a single district judge issue a nationwide injunction that blocks an executive action for everyone, because large challenges will be heard by a three-judge panel.
Parties and taxpayers benefit from increased impartiality and reduced forum-shopping because judges for these panels are designated by the Chief Justice with randomized selection, limiting a single judge's unilateral control over major executive-action challenges.
Individuals, states, and federal employees seeking urgent court-ordered protection may face slower access to relief because assembling a three-judge panel can delay emergency decisions.
All parties and taxpayers could face higher litigation costs and longer timelines because requiring Chief Justice designation and randomized panel selection adds administrative steps and complexity.
Federal courts' routine case management could become less flexible—e.g., in appointing masters or using magistrate referrals—which may increase judicial workload and procedural rigidity for cases involving federal employees and others.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Mandates three-judge district courts and majority-panel approval for suits seeking to restrain executive-branch actions or presidential executive orders, limiting single-judge emergency powers.
Introduced March 24, 2025 by Mike Lee · Last progress March 24, 2025
Creates a rule that many lawsuits asking courts to block or undo executive-branch actions or presidential executive orders must be heard by a three-judge district court instead of a single judge. It sets how those three judges are chosen, requires a majority of the three judges to approve any temporary or final equitable relief, and prevents a single judge from granting or referring such emergency relief.