“Election Dejection”

November’s results obviously make it more of an uphill slog for legal reformers to win legislative victories; a roundup in Inside Counsel provides some details, quoting me along the way. (Mary Swanton, January). I venture a prediction that Democrats will use their new Congressional power to push legislation that would expand private causes of action […]

November’s results obviously make it more of an uphill slog for legal reformers to win legislative victories; a roundup in Inside Counsel provides some details, quoting me along the way. (Mary Swanton, January). I venture a prediction that Democrats will use their new Congressional power to push legislation that would expand private causes of action in the employment field, a step that would gratify the plaintiffs’ bar and many union advocates alike. Contrary to an implication that the article may leave, private causes of action are at present very much alive and thriving in the wage and hour field, but they’re not (yet) authorized in the case of many other sorts of labor-law violations.

4 Comments

  • I had heard that trial lawyers were the number 1 contributors to the Democratic party. Part of the Republicans long term consolidation of power thus included tort reform and severe limitations on awards in an attempt to starve their funding sources. So much for that.

  • I’m not going to speculate on whether the Dems attempt to expand causes of action. I will speculate that Bush would veto any such attempt. Your thoughts?

  • Bush didn’t veto Sarbanes-Oxley or the Grassley expansion of qui tam.

  • Qui tam and SOX especially were different political animals. I suppose we’ll have to see how the first 100 hours goes to see how quick Bush is to veto.