Of the 1.65 million lawsuits enforcing federal laws over the past
decade, 3 percent were prosecuted by the federal government, while 97
percent were litigated by private parties. When and why did private
plaintiff-driven litigation become a dominant model for enforcing
federal regulation? The Litigation State shows how government
legislation created the nation's reliance upon private litigation, and
investigates why Congress would choose to mobilize, through statutory
design, private lawsuits to implement federal statutes. Sean Farhang
argues that Congress deliberately cultivates such private lawsuits
partly as a means of enforcing its will over the resistance of opposing
presidents.
Farhang reveals that private lawsuits, functioning as an enforcement
resource, are a profoundly important component of American state
capacity. He demonstrates how the distinctive institutional structure of
the American state--particularly conflict between Congress and the
president over control of the bureaucracy--encourages Congress to
incentivize private lawsuits. Congress thereby achieves regulatory aims
through a decentralized army of private lawyers, rather than by
well-staffed bureaucracies under the president's influence. The
historical development of ideological polarization between Congress and
the president since the late 1960s has been a powerful cause of the
explosion of private lawsuits enforcing federal law over the same
period.
Using data from many policy areas spanning the twentieth century, and
historical analysis focused on civil rights, The Litigation State
investigates how American political institutions shape the strategic
design of legislation to mobilize private lawsuits for policy
implementation.