Charles T. Canady: “Mr. Chairman, I think it is unfortunate that today in this debate we are hearing attacks on the motivation of those who…”

“Mr. Chairman, I think it is unfortunate that today in this debate we are hearing attacks on the motivation of those who are supporting this legislation. This legislation has been introduced because there is a real problem in the administration of justice, a problem that affects property owners, small and large, throughout this country, property owners whose property is taken by an action of government, and property owners who are denied meaningful access to the Federal Court. We are trying to correct that. Now, my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), went through a list of cases that were not litigated in Federal Court but were litigated in State court where the plaintiffs lost. It sounds like to me that those plaintiffs should have lost. And I would submit to the gentleman that they would have lost in Federal Court as well. So I do not know what that list of cases proves. The Federal courts, in my experience, know how to dismiss cases. They know how to get rid of cases on summary judgment. They also know how, in certain circumstances, to award prevailing party attorneys' fees against the party who brings a frivolous claim. And that happens to developers and others who sue local governments when they do not have a basis for their claim. Those attorneys' fees are available and some courts will award them. So I think the Members need to keep that reality in mind.”