Document Type

Article

Publication Date

9-20-2025

Abstract

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) has quietly become the defining feature of the federal civil docket, now accounting for the majority of all pending cases. Yet the judges tasked with steering these sprawling matters confront an almost impossible assignment: They must manage hundreds of thousands of claims, often with skeletal staffs, little binding guidance, and enormous pressure to deliver both efficiency and justice. This report—produced out of a March 2025 convening sponsored by the Rhode Center at Stanford Law School—confronts that reality head-on. Drawing on candid discussions among leading judges, practitioners, and scholars, it dives into four central tensions that shape MDL practice today: How can judges promote claim integrity without sacrificing efficiency or restricting court access? How should judges structure, allocate, and police common benefit fees? How should judges balance competing values when selecting and supervising leadership? And how can judges, along with counsel, craft fair and durable closure mechanisms?

The report provides more than an accounting of current MDL practices. It highlights MDLs as sites of experimentation, where innovations—from AI-assisted claim screening to sliding-scale benefit fees—may well ripple outward to reshape civil litigation more broadly. So too does it offer a candid assessment of areas where more research and data are necessary to usher in improvements in MDL practice and policy. And, in synthesizing insights and disagreements, the report underscores a simple truth: MDL management decisions reverberate far beyond any single case. If we are not getting MDLs right, we are not getting civil justice right, period. Accordingly, we ought to be doing our best to make MDLs a site of access, equity, efficiency, and transparency. This report charts pathways toward that vital goal.

Download

Share

COinS