Lawyers in Court Could Get New Protections: 2025 Bill Shifts Oversight, Blocks Some Lawsuits

Alright, let's talk about a bill that could really shake up how lawyers operate in court and when they're collecting debts. It's called the Restoring Court Authority Over Litigation Act of 2025, and its main gig is to put state and federal courts solely in charge of policing attorneys' behavior during lawsuits. This means federal agencies like the FTC and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which currently have a say, would be benched when it comes to lawyers' litigation tactics. Plus, if this passes, you wouldn't be able to sue the opposing counsel in federal court if you think they pulled some shady stuff during your case.

Who's Calling the Shots on Courtroom Conduct?

This bill basically says that when lawyers are doing lawyerly things in a lawsuit – what Section 3 calls 'litigation activities,' like filing papers, sending discovery demands, or arguing in front of a judge – only the courts get to regulate them. Federal agencies? Section 3 is pretty blunt: they 'do not have supervisory, enforcement, or regulatory authority' over these activities. So, if an attorney is working for a debt collector and pushing hard in court, agencies like the CFPB, which keep an eye on consumer financial protection, would have to step back from overseeing those specific litigation actions. The bill’s argument, laid out in its findings (SEC. 2), is that this is how it used to be, and it's about stopping different sets of rules from clashing.

So, What's This Mean for Debt Collection and Your Legal Battles?

Here’s where it gets real for everyday folks. If you're up against a lawyer in court, or dealing with one trying to collect a debt, your playbook might change. Section 4 of the bill digs into some big consumer protection laws. It wants to amend the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) so that a licensed attorney or law firm 'engaged in litigation to collect a debt on behalf of a client' gets a pass from being labeled a 'debt collector' under a new subparagraph (F) of 15 U.S.C. 1692a(6). This is a big deal because the FDCPA has specific rules about what debt collectors can and can't do. The bill also tweaks the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (in 12 U.S.C. 5517(e)) to say its rules against unfair or deceptive practices might not apply to these litigating attorneys if they're already carved out under the FDCPA changes. And here’s a kicker from Section 3: the bill 'prohibits private civil actions in federal courts seeking relief for harm arising from alleged misconduct related to the litigation activities of an opposing attorney.' Translation: if you think the lawyer on the other side is playing dirty during the lawsuit itself, suing them directly in federal court over it is off the table.

The Judge as the Only Umpire: Pros and Cons

The bill's authors would say this is about giving courts back their rightful power and making regulation less of a patchwork quilt (as suggested in SEC. 2). One clear set of rules, enforced by judges and state bar associations, sounds simpler, right? Maybe. But taking federal consumer watchdogs off the field and limiting your ability to sue an opposing attorney in federal court for their litigation conduct raises some serious questions about who’s really protected. Think about it: if a lawyer involved in debt collection litigation uses aggressive tactics that might currently get them in hot water with the CFPB or violate parts of the FDCPA they're no longer subject to, who steps in then? Courts can discipline lawyers, sure, but their focus and the way they handle things might be different from what a dedicated consumer protection agency offers. This could mean fewer direct ways for you to fight back if you feel an attorney has crossed a line while litigating, especially when you're already stressed out dealing with a lawsuit or a debt collector.