3 ms·

Question from an outsider: Why is that 95% of the times I see something get stopped or overturned, it is from a court / judge in Texas?

throwaway48476 2y ago
Reflects the bias of your news reading. Federal courts mirror the politics of their location. Naturally this leads to circuit splits.
- ahiknsr 2y ago
  > Reflects the bias of your news reading. Right, it only reflects the bias of what news we read and has nothing to do with reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Albright https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Albright > Alan D Albright[1][a] (born November 24, 1959)[2] is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. He was formerly a United States magistrate judge of the same court. Albright oversees a significant portion of patent litigation within the United States. In 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit repeatedly rebuked him in a string of opinions for failing to transfer cases to more apt jurisdictions. A quarter of all patent lawsuits in the US were once heard by Albright, who has been widely criticized for ignoring binding case law. However, following a docket-stripping order issued by Chief Judge Orlando Garcia, Albright's patent docket has declined precipitously
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    Patent issues are a case of circuit shopping, not differences in plain text interpretation of sovereign power cases.
Micanthus 2y ago
A couple reasons: 1) Recency bias, you probably remember more of these cases from Texas right now because that's the subject of this article. 2) The district and appelate courts in the US vary widely in their judicial ideologies, and usually align closely with their local political leanings. In today's political landscape with a democratic administration, it's unsurprising that courts in conservative districts frequently rule against federal agencies. Notably this judge was appointed by Trump, and is citing recent rulings and legal theory from the current radically conservative Supreme Court. Judges in liberal areas are still under some obligation to take precedent into account, so the case may have gone the same way even with a liberal judge, now that the Chevron Doctrine is more or less dead due to the Supreme Court. But liberal judges still often diverge from the legal theory conservative supreme court justices are using today. 3) Judge shopping, ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_shopping#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_shopping#United_States ) the case was intentionally filed in a district that is known for conservative judges that are friendly to corporations, were appointed by Trump, and align closely to the supreme court's legal ideology. The Northern District of Texas were this case was decided is a common choice for such shopping, especially because they explicitly ignore policy guidelines (that are sadly nonbinding) to prevent judge shopping.
- tallanvor 2y ago
  Let's be honest, though, for pro-business rulings #3 is the main reason. Businesses know that filing in that District is guaranteed to get them a judge that almost always sides with them.

throwaway48476 2y ago

Reflects the bias of your news reading. Federal courts mirror the politics of their location. Naturally this leads to circuit splits.

ahiknsr 2y ago
> Reflects the bias of your news reading. Right, it only reflects the bias of what news we read and has nothing to do with reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Albright https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Albright > Alan D Albright[1][a] (born November 24, 1959)[2] is a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. He was formerly a United States magistrate judge of the same court. Albright oversees a significant portion of patent litigation within the United States. In 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit repeatedly rebuked him in a string of opinions for failing to transfer cases to more apt jurisdictions. A quarter of all patent lawsuits in the US were once heard by Albright, who has been widely criticized for ignoring binding case law. However, following a docket-stripping order issued by Chief Judge Orlando Garcia, Albright's patent docket has declined precipitously
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Patent issues are a case of circuit shopping, not differences in plain text interpretation of sovereign power cases.

Micanthus 2y ago

A couple reasons: 1) Recency bias, you probably remember more of these cases from Texas right now because that's the subject of this article. 2) The district and appelate courts in the US vary widely in their judicial ideologies, and usually align closely with their local political leanings. In today's political landscape with a democratic administration, it's unsurprising that courts in conservative districts frequently rule against federal agencies. Notably this judge was appointed by Trump, and is citing recent rulings and legal theory from the current radically conservative Supreme Court. Judges in liberal areas are still under some obligation to take precedent into account, so the case may have gone the same way even with a liberal judge, now that the Chevron Doctrine is more or less dead due to the Supreme Court. But liberal judges still often diverge from the legal theory conservative supreme court justices are using today. 3) Judge shopping, ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_shopping#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_shopping#United_States ) the case was intentionally filed in a district that is known for conservative judges that are friendly to corporations, were appointed by Trump, and align closely to the supreme court's legal ideology. The Northern District of Texas were this case was decided is a common choice for such shopping, especially because they explicitly ignore policy guidelines (that are sadly nonbinding) to prevent judge shopping.

tallanvor 2y ago
Let's be honest, though, for pro-business rulings #3 is the main reason. Businesses know that filing in that District is guaranteed to get them a judge that almost always sides with them.