Short title

This Act may be cited as the

Federal Consent Decree Fairness Act

Findings

Congress finds that the United States Supreme Court, in its unanimous decision in Frew v. Hawkins, 540 U.S. 431 (2004), found the following: (1)Consent decrees may lead to federal court oversight of state programs for long periods of time even absent an ongoing violation of federal law,. 540 U.S. 431, 441. (2)If not limited to reasonable and necessary implementations of federal law, remedies outlined in consent decrees involving state officeholders may improperly deprive future officials of their designated legislative and executive powers.. 540 U.S. 431, 441. (3)The federal court must exercise its equitable powers to ensure that when the objects of the decree have been attained, responsibility for discharging the State’s obligations is returned promptly to the State and its officials. . 540 U.S. 431, 442. (4)As public servants, the officials of the State must be presumed to have a high degree of competence in deciding how best to discharge their governmental responsibilities.. 540 U.S. 431, 442. (5)A State, in the ordinary course, depends upon successor officials, both appointed and elected, to bring new insights and solutions to problems of allocating revenues and resources. The basic obligations of federal law may remain the same, but the precise manner of their discharge may not.. 540 U.S. 431, 442.

Limitation on consent decrees

(a)

In general

Chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

1660.

Consent decrees

(a)

Definition

In this section, the term consent decree— (1)means any order imposing injunctive or other prospective relief against a State or local government, or a State or local official against whom suit is brought, that is entered by a court of the United States and is based in whole or part upon the consent or acquiescence of the parties; and (2)does not include— (A)any private settlement agreement; (B)any order arising from an action filed against a government official that is unrelated to his or her official duties; (C)any order entered by a court of the United States to implement a plan to end segregation of students or faculty on the basis of race, color, or national origin in elementary schools, secondary schools, or institutions of higher education; and (D)any order entered in any action in which one State is an adverse party to another State. (b)

Limitation on duration

(1)

In general

A State or local government, or a State or local official who is a party to a consent decree (or the successor to that individual) may file a motion under this section with the court that entered the consent decree to modify or terminate the consent decree upon the earliest of— (A)4 years after the consent decree is originally entered by a court of the United States, regardless of whether the consent decree has been modified or reentered during that period; (B)in the case of a civil action in which a State or an elected State official is a party, the date of expiration of the term of office of the highest elected State official who is a party to the consent decree; (C)in the case of a civil action in which a local government or elected local government official is a party, the date of expiration of the term of office of the highest elected local government official who is a party to the consent decree; (D)in the case of a civil action in which the consent to the consent decree was authorized by an appointed State or local official, the date of expiration of the term of office of the elected official who appointed that State or local official, or the highest elected official in that State or local government; or (E)the date otherwise provided by law. (2)

Burden of proof

(A)

In general

With respect to any motion filed under paragraph (1), the burden of proof shall be on the party who originally filed the civil action to demonstrate that the denial of the motion to modify or terminate the consent decree or any part of the consent decree is necessary to prevent the violation of a requirement of Federal law that— (i)was actionable by such party; and (ii)was addressed in the consent decree. (B)

Failure to meet burden of proof

If a party fails to meet the burden of proof described in subparagraph (A), the court shall terminate the consent decree. (C)

Satisfaction of burden of proof

If a party meets the burden of proof described in subparagraph (A), the court shall ensure that any remaining provisions of the consent decree represent the least restrictive means by which to prevent such a violation. (3)

Ruling on motion

(A)

In general

The court shall rule expeditiously on a motion filed under this subsection. (B)

Scheduling order

Not later than 30 days after the filing of a motion under this subsection, the court shall enter a scheduling order that— (i)limits the time of the parties to— (I)file motions; and (II)complete any required discovery; and (ii)sets the date or dates of any hearings determined necessary. (C)

Stay of injunctive or prospective relief

In addition to any other orders authorized by law, the court may stay the injunctive or prospective relief set forth in the consent decree in an action under this subsection if a party opposing the motion to modify or terminate the consent decree seeks any continuance or delay that prevents the court from entering a final ruling on the motion within 180 days after the date on which the motion is filed. (c)

Other Federal court remedies

The provisions of this section shall not be interpreted to prohibit a Federal court from entering a new order for injunctive or prospective relief to the extent that it is otherwise authorized by Federal law. (d)

Available State court remedies

The provisions of this section shall not prohibit the parties to a consent decree from seeking appropriate relief under State law.

(b)

Conforming amendment

The table of sections for chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

1660. Consent decrees.

General Principles

(a)

No effect on other laws relating to modifying or vacating consent decrees

Nothing in the amendments made by section 3 shall be construed to preempt or modify any other provision of law providing for the modification or vacating of a consent decree. (b)

Further proceedings not required

Nothing in the amendments made by section 3 shall be construed to affect or require further judicial proceedings relating to prior adjudications of liability or class certifications.

Definition

In this Act, the term consent decree has the meaning given that term in section 1660(a) of title 28, United States Code, as added by section 3 of this Act.

Effective date

This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and apply to any consent decree regardless of— (1)the date on which the order of the consent decree is entered; or (2)whether any relief has been obtained under the consent decree before such date of enactment.