The Class Action Fairness Act in Perspective: the Old and the New in Federal Jurisdictional Reform

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) was the product of an extended and well-organized political campaign. In Congress, its passage required a grinding eight-year effort, several modifications to the original proposal, numerous committee hearings, multiple reports by both Houses, political compromises that drew some Democratic support, two unsuccessful attempts to terminate debate in the Senate by imposing cloture, and strenuous efforts to amend in both the House and Senate when the bill came to the floor for a final vote.2 Passage also required Republican control of both Houses of Congress and the presidency as well. Compared to the determined political campaign necessary to secure its passage, CAFA itself might seem a relatively minor measure. Ostensibly, it altered no substantive law, denied no one a judicial forum, left the federal judicial power untouched, relied on established congressional authority, and bowed to federalism by limiting its extension of national authority to class actions with significant interstate connections. Indeed, the changes it made might appear to some nar-