The U.S. House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing this week to review how the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) is used in lawsuits involving federal agencies. Lawmakers examined whether repeated legal challenges may influence policy decisions and increase administrative costs.
NCBA Shares Concerns About Reporting Gaps
Todd Wilkinson, a South Dakota cattle producer and past president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), spoke at the hearing. He said the government stopped tracking EAJA payments in 1995, which makes it harder to see how often groups use the program or how much money they receive.
EAJA was created to help individuals and small entities challenge government actions without facing large legal bills. Today, the law also allows payments when parties reach settlements, not just when they win a case.
Questions Around Settlement-Driven Policy Changes
Wilkinson told the committee that some lawsuits may lead agencies to change policy through settlement agreements instead of court rulings. He asked Congress to consider several updates to EAJA. These included bringing back reporting requirements, reviewing how tax-exempt groups qualify, and setting clearer limits on legal fees.
Past Research Shows Costly “Sue-and-Settle” Cases
A 2013 U.S. Chamber of Commerce report looked at 71 “sue-and-settle” cases. Those cases resulted in more than 100 new regulations and more than $100 million in estimated yearly compliance costs. Since then, many policymakers and industry groups have continued to discuss the cost of ongoing litigation and regulatory actions.
Different Groups See EAJA’s Role Differently
NCBA supports reforms that it says would improve transparency. Some environmental groups, however, have argued in previous debates that EAJA helps hold federal agencies accountable when they do not follow the law. No environmental organizations testified at this week’s hearing.
Next Steps
The Subcommittee plans to continue reviewing issues related to EAJA as part of its work on federal regulatory processes. Lawmakers did not introduce new legislation during this session.
