Justices Adopt Hard Cap on Attorneys’ Fees in Rights Cases (1)

Civil rights lawyers lost a major battle as the US Supreme Court adopted a categorical rule for when plaintiffs can get attorneys’ fees after after a temporary win against government officials.

In a 7-2 ruling on Tuesday, the Supreme Court said plaintiffs can never get fees after obtaining a preliminary injunction that is later mooted, setting a bright-line rule.

Writing for the court, Chief Justice John Roberts said the plaintiffs don’t count as “prevailing parties” entitled to attorneys’ fees because no court has conclusively resolved their claims.

Outside briefs from across the political spectrum urged the justices to reject the explicit rule, saying it would deter civil rights lawyers from taking meritorious cases and encourage gamesmanship by government officials.

The court ruled in the case of indigent Virginia drivers who challenged a state law that automatically suspended their licenses for failure to pay certain court fees. The Legislature changed the law after the plaintiffs won a preliminary injunction.

Virginia argued the temporary win didn’t make them prevailing parties entitled to attorneys’ fees from the state.

“A plaintiff who wins a transient victory on a preliminary injunction does not become a ‘prevailing party’ simply because external events convert the transient victory into a lasting one,” Roberts said, in siding with the state.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor in dissent, emphasizing the victory in favor of the plaintiffs, though temporary, was never overturned.

The case is Lackey v. Stinnie, U.S., No. 23-621.