Legal Definitions - EAJA

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) is a federal law designed to help individuals, small businesses, and certain organizations recover their legal fees and expenses when they successfully challenge an action taken by the U.S. government in court, and the government's position in the case was not 'substantially justified'. This means the government's stance lacked a reasonable basis in law and fact.

The EAJA aims to ensure that smaller parties are not deterred from challenging unreasonable government actions due to the high cost of litigation, thereby promoting fairness and accountability. If a party wins against the government and the government's position was deemed not substantially justified, they can petition the court to have their attorney's fees and other litigation expenses paid by the government.

• Example 1: Social Security Disability Benefits

  Imagine an individual who has been denied Social Security disability benefits. After exhausting administrative appeals, they file a lawsuit against the Social Security Administration (SSA) in federal court. The court reviews the case and finds that the SSA's decision was based on an incorrect interpretation of medical evidence and was therefore unreasonable. The court reverses the SSA's denial and orders that the individual receive benefits.

  How it illustrates EAJA: Because the individual successfully challenged the government's position (the SSA's denial) and the court determined that the SSA's defense of its denial was not substantially justified, the individual can apply under the EAJA to have their attorney's fees and other litigation costs reimbursed by the government. This ensures they don't bear the full financial burden of correcting an unreasonable government error.

• Example 2: Small Business and Regulatory Compliance

  Consider a small, family-owned manufacturing company that receives a significant fine from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for an alleged violation of a complex environmental regulation. The company believes it was in compliance and that the EPA misinterpreted the regulation. They hire a lawyer, challenge the fine in court, and ultimately win, with the court ruling that the EPA's interpretation and enforcement action were arbitrary and capricious.

  How it illustrates EAJA: Since the small business prevailed against the EPA and the court found the EPA's position to be without substantial justification, the company can seek reimbursement for its legal fees, expert witness costs, and other expenses under the EAJA. This prevents the government from using its vast resources to unfairly penalize or burden a smaller entity with costly litigation when its own actions were not sound.

• Example 3: Immigration Application Denial

  A family applies for a specific immigration visa, but their application is denied by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). The family believes the denial was based on a clear misapplication of immigration law. They file a lawsuit in federal court, and the court agrees, finding that USCIS's interpretation of the law was erroneous and that the family was indeed eligible for the visa. The court orders USCIS to approve the application.

  How it illustrates EAJA: In this scenario, if the court determines that USCIS's defense of its denial was not substantially justified, the family can petition for their legal expenses, including attorney's fees, to be paid by the government under the EAJA. This helps ensure that individuals are not financially penalized for challenging an incorrect decision by an immigration agency.