Judicial Pay Question Arises in Supreme Court Budget Hearing

Justices Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas appeared before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary in March to discuss the Supreme Court's budget. But after Kennedy detailed the fiscal year 2003 budget request, Chairman Ernest Hollings (D-SC) commented on the Court's recent decision in Williams v. United States.He appeared to say that if members of the Judiciary felt an annual COLA under the 1989 Ethics Reform Act was absolutely guaranteed, then he might propose a look at the Act to see if judges' inclusion in that COLA provision be deleted. Hollings noted that judges' pay and that of members of Congress was tied by tradition--adding that he thought senators also were underpaid.

Justice Kennedy responded that he had not come prepared to make a statement about judicial salaries and was "reluctant to say too much in part because I fear my remarks might be inadequate to express the feeling of frustration and disappointment on the part of Article III judges throughout the United States at having been specifically denied four different COLAS when all other members of the government, save Congress, received it."

Kennedy told the subcommittee, "it is the absolute urgent responsibility of the Congress of the United States to address the fact that judicial salaries since 1970, compared with the national average of salaries, have declined in real dollar value 36 percent. We're losing, Mr. Chairman, judges at a record rate and when you lose a judge who is eligible for senior status you have to pay all of his retirement, all his full salary, anyway. But then you have to replace that judge by more judges, so it's not cost-effective."

He concluded by saying two issues exist on the salary issue: the question of the base level for judicial salaries that Congress needs to address and, if Congress requires advice and guidance in this area, the appointment of a commission to make these recommendations.