Moratorium on EAJA Fees?
Recently, the House of Representatives voted to impose a seven-month moratorium on Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) fees. The sponsors of this amendment intend to restrict environmental groups from filing supposedly frivolous lawsuits. But Social Security advocates and their clients would be hit particularly hard. This is because the majority of EAJA fees awarded by federal courts are awarded to attorneys representing disabled citizens and veterans who were unfairly denied Social Security benefits. As Rep. Markey points out in the deliberations, the passage of this amendment would only serve to disempower social security claimants and veterans.
This would be the second damaging blow for Social Security attorneys in the last year. Recently, in Astrue v. Ratliff¸ the Supreme Court unanimously held that EAJA fees are to be paid directly to the plaintiff—not the attorney.130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010). As a result, the attorney fees are subject to garnishment by the Federal Government for payment of government debts such as past-due child support and defaulted student loans.
Hopefully, the Senate will recognize how an EAJA moratorium will negatively impact citizens and veterans who have been unfairly denied benefits. You can read the deliberations here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49535676/EAJA-Deliberations