Do the Feds Need to Publish How Much they Spend on Legal Fees? (H.R. 3279)
Do you support or oppose this bill?
What is H.R. 3279?
(Updated July 13, 2017)
This bill would require the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) to annually prepare a report detailing the amount of fees and other expenses awarded by federal courts to nonfederal entities when they prevail in cases against the U.S.
"Congress passed the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) as a means to help individuals, retirees, veterans, and small businesses recover attorney’s fees and costs associated with suing the federal government. Congress intended EAJA to remove a barrier to justice for those with limited access to the resources it takes to sue or defend against the federal government."
Under this legislation, the ACUS would
also be required to create a publicly-available searchable online
database with information on the cases where fees and expenses were
awarded by courts or federal agencies. The ACUS is an independent agency
that assists other agencies of the federal government in improving
regulatory and other administrative procedures.
Argument in favor
People in the U.S. have the right to know how much money is being spent on legal cases, and the government has a duty to be transparent about it.
Argument opposed
This bill attempts to unfairly restrict unwanted legal challenges to the government, and tries to suppress disfavored plaintiffs.
Impact
People suing the U.S., federal government agencies, the Administrative Conference of the United States, and the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Cost of H.R. 3279
The CBO estimates that this bill would cost $1 million during fiscal year 2016 and $500,000 annually in subsequent years.
Additional Info
Of Note: Much of the to-do on this issue centers around the concerns expressed by Congressional members over environmental groups abusing provisions of the EAJA. There have been claims that while the original intent of the EAJA was to help out the "small fry" when taking the government to court, it has actually helped big environmental groups to recoup some of the expensive litigation fees they lost when filing suits on environmental issues.
In 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent, nonpartisan agency, published a report that analyzed cases brought against the Environmental Protection Agency. The GAO found that the majority of suits were brought by trade associations or private companies, and that lawyer fees were awarded in under ten percent of cases.
Media:
(Photo Credit: Flickr user srqpix)
The Latest
-
IT: 🛢️ New Vermont measure could charge Big Oil for climate damages, and... Do you think Trump is guilty?Welcome to Friday, May 10th, friends... Vermont could be one of the first states to hold Big Oil accountable for the damages read more...
-
Stormy Daniels Takes the Stand in Trump Hush Money TrialUpdated May 9, 2024, 5:00 p.m. EST Adult film star Stormy Daniels, also known as Stephanie Clifford, spent two days on the stand read more... Law Enforcement
-
Vermont Measure to Charge Big Oil for Climate DamagesWhat’s the story? Vermont is expected to become one of the first states to hold Big Oil accountable for the damages caused by read more... Environment
-
IT: Trump's 2016 'deny, deny, deny' campaign strategy, and... How can you help the civilians of Ukraine?Welcome to Wednesday, May 8th, weekenders... As Trump's hush money trial enters it's third week, the 2016 campaign strategy of read more...