The real pay for federal judges has declined dramatically.
- The annual cost of living adjustment (COLA) mechanism for judges established under the Ethics Reform Act has not operated as intended. Since 1992, the pay of most federal workers has increased by 91 percent, while inflation has increased by 36 percent. However, judicial pay has fallen way behind, increasing by only 39 percent over this time.
click to expand
- The repeated denials of the COLAs in 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2007, and 2010 have created major and growing financial losses for judges: a district court judge on the bench since 1993 failed to receive a total of $283,100 in statutorily authorized but denied pay. Appellate court judges have lost even more.
Many federal employees can now earn substantially more than judges.
- Thousands of federal employees (i.e., professional positions in the executive branch and banking agencies) can now receive salaries at or above the salary of district judges (currently $174,000).
- Many federal employees can now receive total compensation exceeding $200,000 annually.
Judicial salaries should be increased significantly, and there is precedent to do so.
- 1989: Ethics Reform Act effected net increases of 35-40% over two-year period.
- 1969: Quadrennial Commission established varying salary increases (e.g., 33% for district court judges, up to 56% for the Chief Justice).
The Volcker Commission declared that "Judicial salaries are the most egregious example of the failure of federal compensation policies."
- In January 2003, the National Commission on the Public Service (the "Volcker Commission") found "that the lag in judicial salaries has gone on too long, and the potential for the diminished quality in American jurisprudence is now too large." (Volcker Commission Report)
- The Volcker Commission recommended that Congress' "first priority . . . should be an immediate and substantial increase in judicial salaries."
Low federal judicial salaries threaten the independence of the Third Branch.
Chief Justice Roberts has stated that:
- "Inadequate compensation directly threatens the viability of life tenure, and if tenure in office is made uncertain, the strength and independence judges need to uphold the rule of law-even when it is unpopular to do so-will be seriously eroded."
- "If judicial appointment ceases to be the capstone of a distinguished career and instead becomes a stepping stone to a lucrative position in private practice, the Framers' goal of a truly independent judiciary will be placed in serious jeopardy."
Good, experienced judges are leaving the bench.
click to expand
- Since 1990, 123 Article III judges have left the bench through resignation or retirement.
- Many of the judges who have resigned or retired in recent years have noted that financial considerations were a big factor in their decision to leave the bench. Several have joined law firms or private arbitration/mediation groups, earning several times more than their previous federal salaries.
- Other judges have left to become corporate counsels, earning average compensation of more than $700,000 in salary and bonuses, plus the possibility of stock options.
- Even law clerks who join major law firms as first-year associates can earn more in their first year than any federal judge earns ($135,000 to $165,000 base salary, plus substantial signing bonuses and other payments).
The Judicial Conference supports increases in compensation for senior officials in all three branches of government.
- The Volcker Commission declared that "Congress should grant an immediate and significant increase in judicial, executive, and legislative salaries to ensure a reasonable relationship to other professional opportunities."
- The Judicial Conference has consistently supported efforts to enact immediate increases in pay for judges, Members of Congress and senior executive branch officials, as well as other related proposals to improve the overall compensation system for high-level government officials.