Alliance for Justice Releases Report on Oil Spill Multidistrict Litigation and BP’s Requested Judge

Washington, D.C., July 28, 2010 – Over 300 federal lawsuits have been filed in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Because the identity of the judge (or judges) chosen to hear the cases and the locations where the cases are litigated can potentially have a profound impact on outcomes, all eyes are turning this Thursday to Boise, Idaho, where the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) is scheduled to hear oral argument to determine whether hundreds of civil actions will be consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL). In advance of the hearing, Alliance for Justice has released a report, Multidistrict Litigation and the Prospects for Justice, explaining the role of the panel and highlighting what's at stake in the outcome.

Decisions made by the panel, which is made up of judges appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States, will set the tone for the many years of litigation that are undoubtedly ahead for the people of the Gulf and are of vital importance in determining whether all Americans will have equal access to the courts and, ultimately, to justice.

Parties on both sides are asking the panel to appoint either specific judges or assign the cases to particular jurisdictions. As an example of how litigants seek advantages, the report pays particular attention to Judge Lynn H. Hughes, the Houston-based judge BP is urging the panel to appoint to hear its cases. AFJ's research reveals that Judge Hughes has deep and extensive ties to the oil industry, including significant financial holdings and connections to industry-sponsored organizations.

His story is not unique, however, as detailed in AFJ's recent report, Judicial Gusher: The Fifth Circuit's Ties to Oil, which demonstrated that many of the federal judges in the Gulf region have substantial personal and financial ties to the oil and gas industry. These investments and other connections to the industry threaten to undermine the appearance of impartiality and raise the risk of diminishing the public's confidence in the judiciary. The report calls for the panel to be cognizant of the effects of its decisions on the credibility of the judicial system, and points out that as victims of the Deepwater Horizon tragedy make their way into federal courts seeking justice, it is imperative that they face judges whose objectivity is beyond question.