class actions, disabled rights, copyright, attorneys general, online speech, law schools, obesity, New York, mortgages, legal blogs, safety, CPSC, pharmaceuticals, patent trolls, ADA filing mills, international human rights, humor, hate speech, illegal drugs, immigration law, cellphones, international law, real estate, bar associations, Environmental Protection Agency, First Amendment, insurance fraud, slip and fall, smoking bans, emergency medicine, regulation and its reform, dramshop statutes, hotels, web accessibility, United Nations, Alien Tort Claims Act, lobbyists, pools, school discipline, Voting Rights Act, legal services programs


« More on Edwards | Bernstein on Edwards »

July 06, 2004

Class Action Fairness Act to hit the Senate floor

After a series of procedural delays spanning months, the Class Action Fairness Act , S. 2062, is finally scheduled to come up for debate this evening (registration required, see also Associated Press report), with a vote potentially as early as tomorrow. Predictably, Ralph Nader and Joan Claybrook's Public Citizen has squealed, as has the New York Times (registration required).

In addition to my earlier PointOfLaw comment on the Act, see my Wall Street Journal column from last June.

Over the last few years, the Manhattan Institute, this site's sponsor, and its Center for Legal Policy, which I direct, have published extensively on the problems of class action litigation in America, from Richard Epstein's theoretical look; to Lester Brickman's case study on a class action in infamously plaintiff-friendly Madison County, Illinois; to the trio of studies written by John Beisner et al that assembled empirical data on magnet court jurisdictions. See also Beisner and Miller's new study looking specifically at the likely effects of the Class Action Fairness Act itself.

Posted by James R. Copland at 04:40 PM | TrackBack (2)

Class Actions



Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.