Judge Barbara Rothstein was appointed to the federal bench in 1980 and is a district judge in the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. She was named Director of the Federal Judicial Center in 2003.

Judge Barbara Rothstein, Western District of Washington

What was your perception of the FJC when you arrived in 2004, and has that perception changed since you became Director? What do you see as the Center’s strengths?

It’s so much more than I expected. I had no idea how truly exciting it would be or of the sheer talent of the people here. These are people—many of whom have been here a very long time—who are all innovative and creative and ready to take on new challenges. When I come up with an idea, people just take it and improve on it. It comes back to me tenfold. It’s a combination of knowledge and talent and the willingness to face new challenges. The Center has to be like that because the Judiciary is a changing institution. If the Center is going to serve the Judiciary, it has to change, too. It needs to be right up there, either a step ahead or in stride with what changes are taking place with judges and with staff.

In the past year the FJC has produced brochures on classified evidence and conducted post BAPCPA-programs, seminars on management skills, and eight major research and evaluation projects, along with many other projects and programs. What is the Center—a research center that educates, or an educational center that does research?

We’re both. I knew the education side when I first became Director, because I had taught a lot of their seminars and went to a lot of their workshops. I had very little knowledge that it even had a research section. But the research is every bit as important as the education. It’s turned into the issues that are facing the Judiciary. When Congress has a problem or an interest in what’s going on in the Judiciary, they turn to the Judicial Conference committees and the committees turn to us, because we are their research arm. People trust us, which is a wonderful thing. They know that our research division is very professional, very neutral, and very informed because we are within the Judicial Branch. So the Center knows the turf and it can hit the ground running on an issue.

How do you select what the Center will study?

We don’t pick it out of the air. The topics come from the Conference committees. For example, our latest big project is on bankruptcy case weighting. That is vital because bankruptcy law has been changed and it is important to examine the caseloads of bankruptcy judges under the new statute. This project will be instrumental in determining the future number of bankruptcy judges.

We did a study on the use of courtrooms. That request came from the Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management but it also involved the Judicial Resources Committee and the Committee on Space and Facilities. It was one of the largest and most complex studies that the Center has ever undertaken.

The Committee on Federal-State Jurisdiction has asked us to do a training video, and we’ve also done research for them on death penalty habeas cases.

We do some studies that aren’t really from the committees. For instance we’re re-doing the scientific reference manual—it straddles education and research—and that’s our own project.

How do you select educational programs for judges and court staff?

We have education advisory committees. The judges who are on those advisory committees are judges who have shown a real interest in education. They’re drawn from all over the country, to make sure we’re not missing something that one area of the country would want. For instance, the border districts always are interested in sentencing and immigration issues. The advisory committees help us plan our workshops.

In addition, I go to all the circuit conferences and to as many of our workshops as I can. Judges are not shy. They come over to me and request workshops on various subjects. There are requests coming from a number of judges. So John Cooke and Bruce Clarke and I sit down and say, <span class="quotes">‘</span>OK. We can only afford this number of seminars. Which of the ones that people really have been asking for do we really need?’

With all of our educational programs we follow an instructional design approach—assessing needs, identifying goals, selecting the best means of meeting those needs—and involving our attendees in the learning process with vignettes, quizzes, role-playing and questions and answers in the lectures. The learning process works best when participants are actively engaged in a discussion, in solving a problem, or in making a decision.

How does the FJC make use of the Web and new media?

The Center uses many distance learning and desktop learning methods to make its programs available. Our recently redesigned intranet site, FJC Online, is now a major source of Center program materials.

One of our biggest projects, which we launched August 18, is the Judges’ IT page on FJC Online. We’re very proud of it. It’s still a work in progress, but it’s easy for people to use. There are about 100 tutorials for judges on IT solutions that make things easier for them, things that they can use in their daily work and are timesavers. Or suppose we had a workshop and you’re a judge who didn’t get to go, but you know that at that workshop they discussed law on terrorism. Each workshop has a web page with its agenda and the materials presented. Many sessions are digitally recorded and available on the program page, so a judge can listen to them 24/7 on the computer, or even download them onto an MP3 device and listen elsewhere. Our videos and FJTN programs are also available in streaming videos on tthe website and we have some FJC-based interactive education programs as well. Also, many of our publications are available online and we have a number of resource pages devoted to specific topics, such as the federal death penalty cases, case management issues in terrorism cases, and international law. We have webcasts, where we’ll have everybody on one site talking to each other.

Is this a cost saving measure?

Yes. We have to deliver as much as we can with a very small budget. If you can train people without constantly having to fly people around the country, you can save a lot of money.