INSIDE THIS ISSUE Judiciary Appeals Appropriations Levels Courts Quick to Discover Internet’s Capabilities The Lawyer’s Skill Became the Judge’s Excellence: Associate Supreme Court Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. 1907-1998 Sentencing Commission May Lose Commissioners . . . and Ability to Act Commission Chair to Resign Grand Juries & Jurors: By the Numbers 1999-2000 Judicial Fellows Program Invites Applications Containing Costs While Delivering Effective Representation Committee Chairs Change An Interview with William S. Sessions Judicial Milestones Judicial Boxscore

Click here to go to the Federal Judiciary homepage.

Judiciary Appeals Appropriations Levels

Letters appealing the Judiciary’s fiscal year 1999 funding levels greeted House and Senate appropriations bill conferees on their return from their August recess. The letter to the conferees on HR. 4276, the Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary bill, from Judicial Conference Budget Committee chair Judge John Heyburn and Administrative Office Director Leonidas Ralph Mecham told conferees that with the Judiciary’s growing workload, the level of appropriations in both the House and Senate bills are insufficient to sustain current levels of services. Conferees will begin consideration of the House and Senate appropriations bills sometime in September with the goal of passing all appropriations bills before the planned adjournment of the 105th Congress in October. When current estimates of fees and carryover are included, the Senate bill gives the Judiciary $4.01 billion in total obligations, and the House gives the Judiciary $4.08 billion. The Judiciary’s revised request is for an obligational level of $4.15 billion for FY99.

“We recognize that you have many competing demands for the limited funds and appreciate the increases that you have provided,” the letter said. “However, we would be remiss if we failed to point out that the obligation levels provided for in both the House and Senate versions of H.R. 4276 are insufficient to fund the resources required by the courts to maintain the current levels of services considering their growing workload.”

Caseload Growth

The Judiciary anticipates that even at the higher funding level provided by the House appropriations bill, Judiciary funding will fall short of what is needed. “[B]ased on existing caseload for fiscal year 1998 as well as anticipated carryover into fiscal year 1999,” Heyburn and Mecham warned, “the obligation level provided by the Senate bill is $138 million below what is needed to perform the Judiciary’s constitutional and statutory responsibilities. Even at the higher House level, fiscal year 1999 funding will fall $69 million short of current estimates of total Judiciary requirements.”

The Judiciary’s caseload is experiencing a dramatic growth, particularly in the criminal area. Criminal filings grew by 5.2 percent in FY97 and are expected to grow by another 13 percent in FY98. The growth is the result of increased cases brought by the Department of Justice, which is likely to receive significant increases from Congress for its investigative and litigative functions. Growth in the number of border patrol agents, FBI, DEA and INS agents, and U.S. attorneys increases the number of criminal investigations and prosecutions that ultimately end up in the courts. Without sufficient resources, the courts could become a bottleneck in the criminal justice system. In addition to appeals for additional funding for the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Court of International Trade, and the Federal Judicial Center, the Judiciary urged Senate and House conferees to change language in the appropriation bills’ report in the following areas.

Senate Language

The report accompanying the Senate appropriation bill recommends what amounts to a 25 percent cut in chambers staff. While the rationale is that productivity improvements resulting from automation advances reduce the need for staff, in reality any productivity savings already have been offset by the large increase in the caseload per judge. The cuts recommended by the Senate would significantly reduce the ability of judges to dispose of cases in a prompt and fair manner. The Senate report also recommends that judges’ travel funds be reduced 20 percent. Since the bulk of judges’ travel involves case-related work, the reduction would have a significant impact on how the courts accomplish their responsibilities and may force some litigants to travel long distances to have their cases tried. The Senate report includes language directing the Judiciary to conduct a comprehensive study on sharing courtrooms. The Judicial Con-ference had previously studied the issue and concluded that in the inter-est of the effective administration of justice, a policy of one courtroom for each active judge is required. The RAND Corporation, in an independent review, advised that further study would be costly and inconclusive.

Defender Services Program

The amount of funding provided in both the House and Senate bills is well below the level required to fund the defender services program. With the number of representations under the program expected to increase by 8 percent in FY99 and the number of more expensive capital representations expected to grow by 22 percent, an increase is necessary. A $5 panel attorney rate increase is requested to avoid a crisis in the criminal justice system due to an inability to find qualified attorneys because of the low hourly rates currently paid.

A provision in the Senate bill would also limit monthly payments to panel attorneys to the compensation provided to the U.S. attorney in that district. This statutory change has the potential to disrupt proceedings mid-case if the limit is exceeded in a month and to install a cumbersome monitoring system to track payments.

FY99 Treasury and General Government Appropriations Bill

Letters have also been sent to congressional conferees appealing funding levels for courthouse construction projects in the FY99 Treasury and General Government appropriations bill. The letters ask conferees to reconsider the language in the bill that denies a cost-of-living salary adjustment for members of Congress, judges, and Executive Schedule officers.

In addition, conferees are being urged to delete section 404 of the Senate bill, a provision requiring that new courthouse construction projects requested in FY2000 meet design guide standards, reflect Judicial Conference priorities, and be accompanied by a courtroom utilization study. The Judiciary already complies with the intent of section 404.

The Judiciary also requests an appropriation to achieve Year 2000 computer compliance. Funding for compliance is provided to the Office of Management and Budget only for executive branch agencies.

Judiciary Loses a Friend Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. was buried in Richmond, Virginia last month at services attended by more than 900 people, including all current and retired Supreme Court members. See story on page 3.