We often hear a lot of complaints about “judicial activism.” Definitions vary, but most would agree that it occurs when a judge or judges substitute their own judgment instead of the law. The Supreme Court’s Iqbal decision is a double dose of judicial activism. First, the Supreme Court ignored decades of existing case law to make new rules. Second, the rules they made invite future judges to subjectively decide whether to dismiss a case without any reference to guiding principles. Perhaps Congress will undo it:
On May 18, the U.S. Supreme Court gave corporate defendants a gift that keeps on giving: the Iqbal decision, which has made it easier than ever for defendants to shut down lawsuits before they get to the costly discovery stage.
Now, four months later, civil rights and consumer groups and trial lawyers are beginning to push back. They met on Sept. 14 in Washington, D.C., to lay plans for a two-pronged battle to undo what they see as a devastating blow to their lifeblood litigation. The campaign will be aimed at Congress as well as the rulemaking process for federal courts. Hearings are being planned for October in the House and the Senate.
"This ruling has threatened to upend the way we have been doing things for a very long time," said John Payton of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which is part of the growing coalition. "The alarm is quite real."
Source: Law.com - Plaintiffs Groups Mount Effort to Undo Supreme Court's 'Iqbal' Ruling