1

Background

This question relates to the effects of the judgment in Trump v. CASA, Inc., from the Supreme Court of the United States. The holding is summarized in the syllabus as:

Universal injunctions likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has given to federal courts. The Court grants the Government’s applications for a partial stay of the injunctions entered below, but only to the extent that the injunctions are broader than necessary to provide complete relief to each plaintiff with standing to sue.

Scenario

  1. POTUS signs an executive order making it unlawful for U.S. farmers to use a widely popular fertilizer because it contains a chemical imported from China.
  2. Wm. Rogers, a farmer in West Virginia, files a lawsuit in the district court in Virginia.
  3. The district court rules in his favor.

Question

Can Bill Brown, Rogers' neighbor and also a farmer, use Rogers' suit as a template and submit it to the same district court?

Jen
  • 87,647
  • 5
  • 181
  • 381
Freeman
  • 11
  • 1

1 Answers1

2

Yes, litigants can use arguments that they know to have been successful in the past.

However, it will not be an automatic win, even for similarly situated plaintiffs, because trial courts in the U.S. are not bound by other trial courts of coordinate jurisdiction, even within the same district.

Note though that even after Trump v. CASA, Inc., some remedies that might be available in the first suit under the Administrative Procedure Act would quash the executive order entirely (see footnote 10 of Trump v. CASA, Inc.). Also, "complete relief" for certain types of claims or plaintiffs might require enjoining the impugned government action more generally (see footnote 12, and pp. 17–18). In both those circumstances, there would be no need for a second action.

Jen
  • 87,647
  • 5
  • 181
  • 381