On Thursday, the House of Representatives passed a bill aimed at increasing the number of federal district court judges. This move is seen as an attempt to tackle the growing backlog of cases in courts across the nation. The legislation, known as the Judicial Understaffing Delays Getting Emergencies Solved (JUDGES) Act, proposes to add 63 new federal district court judges and three temporary positions over ten years.
Despite unanimous support in the Senate last summer, recent disagreements among Democrats and a veto warning from President Biden have cast doubt on its enactment. Nevertheless, with a vote of 236 to 173, including support from 29 Democrats and opposition from two Republicans, Chip Roy of Texas and Tim Burchett of Tennessee, the bill has been forwarded to President Biden.
Originally, both parties supported the JUDGES Act in the Senate, viewing it as a step towards depoliticizing judicial nominations. However, contention arose when Republicans moved to vote on the bill post-President-elect Donald Trump's victory – a timing that broke an initial agreement according to Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). Despite these tensions, there’s consensus on one thing: new judgeships could significantly reduce judges' workloads.
The push for more judges comes after nearly three decades without expansion, during which time case filings in district courts surged by 30%. With almost 700,000 cases pending across 94 district courts and only 677 judge positions available (including ten temporary ones), the strain on the judiciary is evident. The JUDGES Act not only addresses this issue but also allows for significant nominations by future presidents – up to 25 by Mr. Trump alone within his term.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) criticized Democratic objections as dissatisfaction with electoral outcomes rather than substantive issues with the bill itself. This development underscores ongoing debates around judicial appointments and their implications for America's legal system amidst increasing demands on its capacity.
Despite unanimous support in the Senate last summer, recent disagreements among Democrats and a veto warning from President Biden have cast doubt on its enactment. Nevertheless, with a vote of 236 to 173, including support from 29 Democrats and opposition from two Republicans, Chip Roy of Texas and Tim Burchett of Tennessee, the bill has been forwarded to President Biden.
Originally, both parties supported the JUDGES Act in the Senate, viewing it as a step towards depoliticizing judicial nominations. However, contention arose when Republicans moved to vote on the bill post-President-elect Donald Trump's victory – a timing that broke an initial agreement according to Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). Despite these tensions, there’s consensus on one thing: new judgeships could significantly reduce judges' workloads.
The push for more judges comes after nearly three decades without expansion, during which time case filings in district courts surged by 30%. With almost 700,000 cases pending across 94 district courts and only 677 judge positions available (including ten temporary ones), the strain on the judiciary is evident. The JUDGES Act not only addresses this issue but also allows for significant nominations by future presidents – up to 25 by Mr. Trump alone within his term.
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) criticized Democratic objections as dissatisfaction with electoral outcomes rather than substantive issues with the bill itself. This development underscores ongoing debates around judicial appointments and their implications for America's legal system amidst increasing demands on its capacity.
