Fresh Tracks Weekly - Reform the EAJA for wildlife

[bayoublaster7527]

Maybe judges should do better in limiting this type of litigation. That may be a separate issue from EAJA reform though. Clearly the EAJA writers had the best of intentions when crafting this legislation, protecting the ability of citizens with little means to challenge the government in court. I don’t think they had the multi-million (or even billion?) dollar environmental advocacy behemoths like Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity in mind when they crafted this bill. And the unintended consequence of creating a lucrative cottage industry for environmental law groups. That’s not to say that EAJA reform may also cause unintended consequences we are not accounting for. I don’t necessarily see EAJA reform as limiting the ability of citizens to pursue litigation, you can still sue the government. Just don’t expect the agency you sued to cover your legal fees if you are a multi-million dollar advocacy group.

I am going to research further, maybe I am missing something. Based on that I may write my Congressional reps. Thanks for start point MtEngineer.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Maybe judges should do better in limiting this type of litigation. That may be a separate issue from EAJA reform though. Clearly the EAJA writers had the best of intentions when crafting this legislation, protecting the ability of citizens with little means to challenge the government in court. I don’t think they had the multi-million (or even billion?) dollar environmental advocacy behemoths like Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity in mind when they crafted this bill. And the unintended consequence of creating a lucrative cottage industry for environmental law groups. That’s not to say that EAJA reform may also cause unintended consequences we are not accounting for. I don’t necessarily see EAJA reform as limiting the ability of citizens to pursue litigation, you can still sue the government. Just don’t expect the agency you sued to cover your legal fees if you are a multi-million dollar advocacy group.

I am going to research further, maybe I am missing something. Based on that I may write my Congressional reps. Thanks for start point MtEngineer.

While groups like the big nationals tend to soak up a lot of the attention on EAJA payments, the bigger issue is the small groups like Native Ecosystems Council, Alliance for the Wild Rockies, etc. These are really small operations that are primarily in existence to sue the gov't and stop any tree project they can under the auspices of saving the grizzly bear, wolf, spotted buttnugget, whatever. 9 times out of 10, their objections have little to do with the actual issue they want to market for donations & press, and the very pedantic process of writing an EA, EIS or any other NEPA document.

Those small serial litigators deliberately play the game of no financial assets so that they don't fall under the watchful eye of the politicos who would rather grandstand on issues than get anything done. The Sierra Club doesn't need EAJA funding to complete it's mission. As @Elky Welky pointed out, litigation is expensive, and the EAJA is absolutely correct in allowing people of honest intent to recover their legal costs to fight their own government.

What we have here is a loophole created by multiple laws, across the NEPA, EAJA, ESA spectrum. Changing NEPA might be the better approach than to try and limit freedom to seek redress against our government. Means testing is likely unconstitutional (as that was part of the issue with the bill Jake mentioned earlier), so I think that a tactical approach with a scalpel to change those organic acts for citizen involvement is the best path forward. Fully recognize that I'm no expert here, and others are much better informed than I.