NEWS RELEASE

Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts

Legislative Needs of Federal Court System Addressed by H.R. 1752

A representative of the Judicial Conference of the United States appeared before Congress today to urge passage of a bill that would improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the federal Judiciary. Judge Harvey Schlesinger (M.D. Fla.), chair of the Conference Committee on the Administration of the Magistrate Judges System, testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee On Courts and Intellectual Property on H.R. 1752, the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1999. The Judicial Conference is the policy-making body of the federal Judiciary.

The bill contains 42 separate provisions and touches upon a wide range of issues including federal court jurisdiction, the authority of judicial officers and judicial branch personnel, and administrative operations. Twenty-nine of the bills provisions passed the House last Congress in the bill, H.R. 2294.

Judge Schlesinger addressed in particular a provision of H.R. 1752 that would provide magistrate judges with summary criminal contempt authority to punish any misbehavior occurring in their presence. "The need for power to immediately vindicate the court's authority in the face of disruptive behavior," Judge Schlesinger told the subcommittee, "exists whenever a magistrate presides for the district court regardless of litigant consent." Penalties imposed by magistrate judges in contempt situations are limited by the bill. This provision was contained in H. R. 2294 and passed the House in the last Congress.

Judge Schlesinger also testified in favor of a provision that directly relates to the personal safety of federal judicial officers. Because of safety concerns raised by a significant increase over the past ten years in threats against judges and their families, federal judicial officers may choose to carry firearms. A provision in H.R. 1752 would effectively require judges who carry firearms to successfully participate in a training and safety program. The provision would also provide that federal judges are, in most circumstances, exempted from state and local firearms laws and regulations. "When they cross state lines, the firearms license from their home state loses its effect," said Judge Schlesinger. "Because of this, judges in travel status often are not able to be armed. Clearly, if a judge is in danger, the fact that he or she is in one state or the other does not eliminate the danger."

H.R. 1752 also would repeal the automatic excuse from jury service now granted to members of the Armed Forces, members of fire and police departments, and public officialswhich even bars from service elected or appointed officials such as school board officials, state legislators, as well as secretaries and clerks appointed by these officials. "These exemptions were established in 1948 on the assumption that it would be a waste of time to include on juries persons whose jobs affect public health, safety, or welfare," Judge Schlesinger testified. "More recent experience has indicated, however, that many individuals who fall within the scope of these exemptions could easily serve."

Additionally, H.R. 1752 addresses recommendations of the Federal Courts Study Committee; improvements to the judicial process including limitations on the removal to federal court of cases under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, and the elimination of in-state plaintiff diversity jurisdiction; a modification of the "Rule of 80" to allow judges to take senior status at age 60 with 20 years of service; and expanded workers' compensation coverage for jurors, the elimination of the public drawing requirement for selection of juror wheels and other modifications to the jury selection process.

Title V of the bill would increase the maximum compensation amounts for Criminal Justice Act attorneys by approximately the rate of inflation since 1986 (43.3 percent), the last year case compensation maximums were increased. The section also would change the case compensation maximum applicable to counsel representing non-capital habeas corpus petitioners, as well as the compensation maximums of investigators, experts, and other service providers. It is not anticipated the changes would have a significant budgetary impact because chief judges of the courts of appeals (or their designees) already have the authority to approve compensation in excess of the statutory limits in appropriate cases.

The complete text of the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1999 can be found on the Judiciary's website at www.uscourts.gov. under "What's New."