September 22, 1999

Dear Member of Congress:

I am writing on behalf of Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law to urge your opposition to H.R. 1875, the Interstate Class Action Jurisdiction Act of 1999, a bill which would substantially alter the Constitutional distribution of judicial power. This bill will unnecessarily overburden federal courts and make it more difficult to have federal claims heard. This bill would profoundly limit the ability of plaintiffs to have class action cases heard in state courts and specifically, would adversely effect the ability of civil rights plaintiffs to swiftly and effectively resolve their legitimate claims. Further, it would infringe on basic principles of federalism and the right of state courts to decide matters of state law. This bill would create an unfair restraint on state courts to develop and advance their own state jurisprudence, especially in the very important area of civil rights.

• This legislation will overburden and create further unnecessary delay in our Federal Courts. This bill will amend federal law to extend federal jurisdiction to cases which were previously triable only in state court. As a result, our federal judiciary will be overloaded and the resolution of all cases in federal court will be delayed, including a majority of civil rights claims. The federal courts are already overburdened with cases that have historically been handled in state courts, this additional burden would be overwhelming. Furthermore, this bill by requiring notice to all attorney generals in states where a class member may reside and by requiring a 120 day waiting period before settlement, creates a substantial, unnecessary delay in the resolution of legitimate claims. These provisions will be particularly damaging in cases where civil rights plaintiffs are seeking immediate injunctive relief to prohibit discriminatory practices of a defendant.



• This legislation undermines fundamental principles of federalism. The United States Constitution recognizes that states are not only fully capable of, but in fact are best suited to interpret their own laws. This legislation directly attacks states' competency to provide an impartial and just resolution of state claims and significantly restricts the independence and integrity of state courts. Finally, by imposing federal jurisdiction upon state class actions, the bill effectively substitutes Federal Rule 23's standards for certification for those of the states; where those are less favorable, defendants will likely remove class actions to take advantage of Rule 23. By allowing the removal of almost all state claims to federal court, even where the claim has nothing to do with federal law and where most class members reside in the state where the class is filed, this legislation creates an affront to the competency of the state judicial system and compromises our basic constitutional principles.



• The bill will have a chilling effect on the use of innovative legal theories and will limit the evolution of state law jurisprudence. As a result of this legislation, state courts will have less opportunity to develop innovate jurisprudence and plaintiffs will be less likely to advance novel, but meritorious, legal theories. This bill moves state law claims into the purview of federal courts who have less experience with state law and who are less apt to extend state law into new areas state courts have yet to address. Therefore, this legislation is very likely to have the result of limiting the advancement of jurisprudence by both the judiciary and members of the bar.

For the reasons discussed above, the proposed Interstate Class Action Jurisdiction Act of 1999 would unnecessarily impair the swift and effective administration of justice, while at the same time trampling our Constitutional principles of federalism. H.R. 1875 is an unduly burdensome approach which compromises delicate federal/state relations by questioning the competency of the state judiciary and which overburdens our already overworked federal judiciary. The Lawyers' Committee urges you to reject this harmful legislation. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Barbara R. Arnwine

Executive Director

back to the top

[back to Access to Justice]