The Roberts Court has generated a remarkable corpus of class action jurisprudence. From Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co. in 2010 through TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez in 2021, it has issued more than two dozen class action decisions. The goal of this Article is not to catalogue this activity, but to focus on decisions in three specific areas: (1) class certification practice under Rule 23, (2) “fraud on the market” securities fraud litigation, and (3) the intersection of class practice and justiciability. I choose them because they show different modes of engagement by the Court: revolution, evolution, and raising topics that will require future attention.
Regarding class certification practice, the Roberts Court has been revolutionary, mandating notable procedural changes—not by amendment of Federal Rule 23, but by interpretation of that provision. In the securities class area, in contrast, the Court has issued a series of evolutionary decisions that culminated in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System in 2021. That case largely closed the circle on issues left open in earlier cases. In the third area, the Court has dipped its toe in the water but not provided guidance. With regard to justiciability and class litigation, the Court has a deal of work to do.