Fy 2011 Congressional Budget Summary
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
The Judiciary
Fiscal Year 2011
Congressional Budget Summary
PREPARED BY
THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS
WASHINGTON, DC
February 2010
1-
FOREWORD
Overview
The Judicial Conference thanks Congress for its continuing
support of the Judiciary and remains grateful for the level of
.funding provided for fiscal year 2010. The Judiciary's fiscal
year 2011 budget request represents a modest increase that the
Judicial Conference believes is the minimum necessary to keep
up with increasing case filings across all areas and other
legislative changes which significantly impact workload
throughout the JUdiciary. In recent years, immigration and drug
offenses along the Southwest Border have dominated
prosecutions. Child pornography and other sex offenses,
however, represent a fast-growing portion ofthe Judiciary's
caseload. Additionally, fraud cases are expected to increase,
exposing high profile Ponzi schemes and securities fraud. The
availability of adequate resources continues to be critical to the
Judiciary's ability to respond to its workload demands.
The fiscal year 2011 request includes an additional $6 million to
provide certain reentry services for persons released from
federal custody as provided for in the Second Chance Act of
2007. The post-conviction supervision population continues to
grow with increasing numbers of inmates being released by the
Bureau of Prisons to begin supervision terms. The Judiciary is
committed to the goal of reducing recidivism by employing
practices that have been validated through empirical evidence
and are cost effective. To maximize the use of limited
resources, we want to ensure that what we are doing actually
produces the outcomes we are seeking. To that end, the Judicial
Conference Committee on Criminal Law commissioned a study
by the Federal Judicial Center to assess the operational aspects,
outcomes, and cost-effectiveness of the various federal reentry
court programs that have sprung up across the nation. The hope
is that such a study will reveal effective approaches that can be
shared with other courts and will identify the current and future
resource implications of such programs.
Bankruptcy filings continue to increase, nearing levels that
preceded implementation of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention
and Consumer Protection Act of2005 (BAPCPA). In addition,
many courts are experiencing significant increases in the
number of pro se debtors. Bankruptcy courts have employed
innovative procedures to manage the growing pace of case
filings and to communicate effectively with debtors attempting
to navigate through this highly specialized area of the law
without the assistance of counsel. To accommodate this
workload, some courts have adjusted staff hours, converted
administrative staff to case administrators, and worked with bar
associations to sponsor pro se help desks. Courts have also
leveraged technology to increase their efficiency in handling the
burgeoning workload. Court-developed software is being used
to automate court calendars, collect and account for filing fees,
pay trustees, and streamline processing of court orders.
Bankruptcy filings are not limited to individuals. An increased
number of businesses filed bankruptcy proceedings during 2009.
The most notable among the recent corporate bankruptcies are
General Motors and Chrysler. These auto industry filings
created job losses and benefit cuts for the company's retirees
and particularly affected automobile dealerships, parts suppliers,
and investors. The continued struggling economy and the
likelihood of further increases in bankruptcy filings indicate a
need for additional resources for the Judiciary.
A total of $71 million is requested to fund security systems and
equipment in fiscal year 2011, a net increase of $10 million over
fiscal year 2010 levels. The Judiciary must keep pace with the
changing nature of the threat to federal courthouses while
maintaining a proper balance between ensuring an open-court
system and having secure court facilities. This is a challenging
task given the increasing number of threats against the courts.
There has been a recent surge in threats to court staff and
probation officers along the Southwest Border, plus the courts
are having to deal with a number of high-threat trials.
In addition to resources for workload increases, the Judiciary's
request includes an additional $25 million investment in a multiyear effort to replace older, less efficient telecommunications
systems in the courts and to make accompanying upgrades to
the data communication network with a focus on converged
services (combining voice, video, and data traffic over a single,
secure network). In light of the efforts to define and consolidate
applications and the implementation of a new managed network,
the Judiciary plans to develop viable alternatives for more costeffective service models applicable to the Case
ManagementJElectronic Case Files system. Additionally,
modernization efforts continue for the Judiciary's Financial
Accounting System for Tomorrow (FAS4T) with an integration
ofthe courts' and the Administrative Office accounting systems,
reconfiguration of FAS4T, and implementation of an internal
controls reporting tool.
Finally, the Judiciary continues to emphasize the importance of
attracting qualified counsel for its defender services program.
The judiciary is appreciative of the $125 per hour non-capital
panel attorney rate provided in fiscal year 2010 and believes we
are moving in the right direction to ensure continued quality
representations. The Judiciary is hopeful that Congress will
build on that rate in fiscal year 2011 and provide the statutorily
authorized hourly rate of $141. The $141 rate keeps pace with
inflation and is necessary to effect a meaningful change in the
willingness of qualified attorneys to accept more non-capital
Criminal Justice Act appointments.
The Judicial Conference continues its commitment to cost
containment, and will attempt to identify new avenues for
savings and cost avoidance. This effort is a high priority - the
Judiciary wants to do its part to help reduce the federal budget
deficit by developing new initiatives that are essential to
continue to slow the growth in budgetary requirements. The
Judicial Conference believes that sustained efforts will continue
11
Overview of The Judiciary
.
--I
The organization of the judiciary, the district and circuit
boundaries, the places of holding court, and the number of
federal judges are established by laws passed by Congress and
signed by the President. The number of federal judges in each
district and in the courts of appeals is authorized by Congress on
the basis of workload.
u.s. Courts of Appeals
12 Regional Circuit Courts of Appeals
1 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit
In addition to the adjudication of cases, other related functions,
such as the provision of criminal defense services and the
supervision of offenders, are prescribed by statute. The
following sections provide a brief overview of the work of the
courts and other related activities of the Judicial Branch.
United States Supreme Court
U.S. District Courts
U.s. Bankruptcy Courts
U.S. Court oflnternational Trade
The United States Supreme Court consists of nine justices, one of
whom is appointed as Chief Justice of the United States. The
Supreme Court is the final arbiter in the federal court system.
United States Courts of Appeals
Other Judiciary Entities/Pro2rams
Probation and Pretrial Services
Defender Services
Court Security
Fees of Jurors and Commissioners
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
Federal Judicial Center
Judiciary Trust Funds
United States Sentencing Commission
~,
There are 13 courts of appeals and 179 authorized appellate court
judgeships nationwide. Twelve of the courts of appeals have
jurisdiction over cases within a regional area or "circuit." The
twelve regional courts of appeals review cases from the United
States district courts and the United States Tax Court, and orders
and decisions from a number of federal administrative agencies.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
has exclusive national jurisdiction over a large number of diverse
subject areas, including international trade, government
contracts, patents, trademarks, certain money claims against the
United States government, federal personnel, and veterans'
benefits. Appeals to the court come from all 94 federal district
courts, as well as the United States Court of Federal Claims, the
United States Court oflnternational Trade, and the United
States Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims.
United States Court of International Trade
The Court of International Trade, with nine Article III judges,
has exclusive nationwide jurisdiction of civil actions against the
United States, its agencies and officers, and certain civil actions
brought by the United States, arising out of import transactions
and the administration and enforcement of the federal customs
and international trade laws.
United States District Courts
There are 94 district judicial courts in the 50 states, the District
of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the
territories of Guam, the u.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern
Mariana Islands. The u.S. District Courts are the courts of
general jurisdiction in the federal court system, and most federal
cases are initially tried and decided in these courts. There are
678 authorized district court judgeships nationwide.
United States Court of Federal Claims
The Court of Federal Claims has nationwide jurisdiction over
certain types of claims against the federal government. Its 16
judges are appointed for a term of 15 years by the President with
the advice and consent of the Senate. Judges appointed to the
Court of Federal Claims are authorized under Article I of the
constitution and do not have the tenure and salary protections of
Article III judges.
The Federal Magistrates Act of 1968 created the office of
magistrate judge to assist the district court judges. Magistrate
judges are non-Article III judges appointed by the district
judges, and they serve for a term of years rather than a lifetime
appointment. Full-time magistrate judges serve a term of eight
years and may be reappointed.
Probation and Pretrial Services
Federal probation and pretrial services officers protect the public
through the investigation' and supervision of defendants and
offenders within the federal criminal justice system. A pretrial
services officer supervises defendants awaiting trial who are
released into our communities and provides a source of
information upon which the court can determine conditions of
release or detentions while criminal cases are pending
adjudication. In support of sentencing determinations, which
require both uniformity of practice and attention to individual
circumstances, probation officers provide the court with reliable
information concerning the offender, the victim, and the offense
committed, as well as an impartial application of the sentencing
United States Bankruptcy Courts
The bankruptcy courts are separate units of the district courts.
Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy
cases. This means that a bankruptcy case cannot be filed in a
state court. United States bankruptcy judges are non-Article III
judges appointed by the courts of appeals for a term of years
rather than a lifetime appointment. They serve for a term of 14
years and may be reappointed.
2
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
guidelines. Probation officers supervise offenders sentenced to
probation as well as offenders coming out of federal prison who
are required to serve a term of supervised release.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts is the central
support entity for the judicial branch. It has management
oversight of the court security program, the probation and pretrial
services program, and the defender services program. It supports
the Judicial Conference ofthe United States in determining
judiciary policies; develops new methods, systems, and programs
for conducting the business of the federal courts efficiently and
economically; develops and supports application of technology;
collects and analyzes statistics on the business of the federal
courts for accurate planning and decisions about resource needs;
provides financial management services and personnel and
payroll support; and conducts audits and reviews to ensure the
continued quality and integrity of federal court operations.
Defender Services
The federal judiciary oversees and administers the federal
defender and appointed counsel program, which provides legal
representation and other services to persons financially unable
to obtain counsel in criminal and related matters in federal court.
The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees that "[i]n
all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right...to
have the assistance of counsel for his defense." The Crimin~l
Justice Act provides that courts shall appoint counsel from
federal public and community defender organizations or from a
panel of private attorneys ("panel attorneys") established by the
court.
Federal Judicial Center
The Federal Judicial Center is the judiciary's research and
education agency. The Center undertakes research and
evaluation of judicial operations and procedures for both the
committees of the Judicial Conference and the courts themselves.
It provides judges, court personnel, and others orientation and
continuing education and training through seminars; curriculum
units for in-court use; monographs and manuals; and audio,
video, and interactive media programs.
Court Security
The judiciary's Court Security appropriation funds protective
guard services and security systems and equipment for United
States courthouses and other facilities housing federal court
operations. These services are contracted for and managed by
the United States Marshals Service, with additional guard
services provided by the Federal Protective Service.
Fees of Jurors and Commissioners
The judiciary receives funding to provide for the statutory fees
and allowances of federal grand and petit jurors and for the
compensation ofland commissioners.
3
Payment to Judiciary Trust Funds
This appropriation finances annuity payments to retired
bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges, u.s. Court of Federal
Claims judges, and spouses and dependent children of deceased
judicial officers.
u.s. Sentencing Commission
The u.s. Sentencing Commission promulgates sentencing
policies, practices, and guidelines for the federal criminal justice
system. The Chair, three Vice Chairs, and three other voting
commissioners are appointed by the President with the advice
and consent of the Senate.
4
Budget Summary - Details of Request
The judiciary's appropriation request for fiscal year 2011 totals
$7,329,485,000 an increase of $468,740,000, or 6.8 percent over
the fiscal year 2010 enacted appropriations. The fiscal year
2011 request provides for an additional 1,137 FTE to meet
critical workload requirements, an increase of 3.3 percent over
the 34,663 FTE funded in 2010.
3. An increase of$39.0 million (10.1 percent of base
adjustments) is requested for the annualization of new space
delivered in fiscal year 2010 the cost of new space expected
to be delivered in fiscal year 2011, and space related
inflation.
4. An increase of$28.6 million (7.4 percent of base
adjustments) will provide for the cost of uncontrollable
workload changes expected in the Defender Services account.
Adjustments to Base
$385.3 million, or 82.2 percent of the $468.7 million total
increase requested, will provide for pay adjustments, inflation
and other adjustments to base necessary to maintain current
servIces.
5. An increase of$26.8 million (7.0 percent of base
adjustments) will provide for inflationary increases in nonpay categories using the government wide inflation factor of
1.1 percent.
Of these $385.3 million in base adjustments:
6. An increase of$22.1 million (5.7 percent of base
adjustments) will provide for additional requirements for
high-threat trials anticipated in fiscal year 2011.
1. An increase of$172.3 million (44.7 percent of the base
adjustments) will provide for inflationary pay and benefit
rate increases, including the annualization of fiscal year
2010 pay adjustments, expected January 2011 pay
adjustments, changes in health benefit premiums, changes in
benefit costs for both judges and supporting personnel, costof-living rate increases for panel attorneys, and a wage rate
adjustment for court security officers.
7. An increase of$19.7 million (5.1 percent of base
adjustments) is necessary to replace non-appropriated sources
of funds used to support base requirements in fiscal year
2010 with direct appropriations. In fiscal year 2011, the
judiciary expects fewer non-appropriated funds (current year
fee collections and prior year unencumbered carryforward
balances) will be available than were available in fiscal year
2010. If the judiciary's base appropriation is not adjusted to
offset the loss in non-appropriated funds, reductions would
have to be made in court operations, and court security
systems and equipment. The judiciary will keep the
Appropriations Subcommittees informed of any changes in
these estimates.
2. An increase of $41.5 million (10.8 percent of base
adjustments) will provide for the annualization of new staff
and court security officers expected to be hired in fiscal year
2010 and new court security officers in fiscal year 2011.
5
]
8. An increase of$13.0 million (3.4 percent of base
adjustments) is associated with increases in the number of
senior judges.
15. A net decrease of$8.9 million (-2.3 percent of base
adjustments) is associated with non-recurring costs for
expenses related to the Supreme Court's building
maintenance and modernization projects, filled fiscal year
2011 judgeships, a decrease to the reimbursement from the
Vaccine Injury Trust Fund, and one-time costs in the
Defender Services and Court Security accounts.
9. An increase of$9.8 million (2.5 percent of base
adjustments) is requested for adjustments above the fiscal
year 2010 funded base for court security systems and
equipment.
Program Increases
10. An increase of$8.0 million (2.1 percent of base
adjustments) is requested for payments to the Judiciary
Retirement Trust Funds.
The remaining $83.4 million, or 17.8 percent, ofthe total
increase is requested for program enhancements and workloadrelated needs.
11. An increase of$5.4 million (1.4 percent of base
adjustments) will provide for estimated increases in Federal
Protective Service security charges.
Of these $83.4 million in program increases:
16. An increase of $40.7 million (48.8 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for additional support staff and
associated costs. This increase is for staffing adjustments due
to the most critical workload (483 FTE).
12. An increase of$4.0 million (1.0 percent of base adjustment)
is associated with an increase in the number of filled Article
III judgeships.
17. An increase of $26.1 million (31.3 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for telecommunications
infrastructure and information technology enhancements.
13. An increase of$3.8 million (1.0 percent of base
adjustments) will provide for base increases necessary to
support, maintain, and continue investments in the
judiciary's information technology program.
18. An increase of $6.3 million (7.5 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for the Supreme Court's roof
system repairs.
14. An increase of $0.2 million (0.1 percent of base
adjustments) is associated with a projected net change in
available jurors.
6
19. An increase of$4.8 million (5.7 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for an increase in the noncapital panel attorney rate to the statuatorily authorized rate
of$141 per hour.
20. An increase of$3.0 million (5.7 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for 6 additional magistrate
judges and associated staff (27 FIE) in districts with
growing caseload.
21. An increase of$0.9 million (1.1 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for necessary investments in
court security, such as a national contract for vehicle barrier
maintenance, and a facial recognition pilot program.
22. An increase of$0.9 million (1.1 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for twelve new police offices (9
FTE) and support expenses at the Supreme Court.
23. An increase of $0.4 million (0.5 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for education and training
program enhancements at the Federal Judicial Center.
24. An increase of $0.3 million (0.4 percent of program
enhancements) will provide for the start-up costs associated
with one new defender organization.
The tables on pages 9 through 12, and the individual account
summaries, provide detailed information on the judiciary's
fiscal year 2011 request.
7
The judiciary proposes the following changes to the
appropriation language for fiscal year 2011:
Old Section 306: The proposed language re-authorizes the pilot
program for the U.S. Marshals Service to provide perimeter
security at a select number of primary courthouses for fiscal year
2011.
Court ofAppeals. District Courts. and Other Judicial Services
Defender Services
The judiciary proposes to delete the following general
provisions:
There are no changes in appropriations language, however,
updates are made to specific citation references to be most
accurate and uniform.
Old Section 307: The language was enacted on December 16,
2009 (P.L 111-117, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010),
because Congress did not enact a Judgeship bill in 2009 that
would have extended these temporary judgeships. It is proposed
for deletion because the Judiciary is hopeful a Judgeship bill will
be enacted during fiscal year 2010.
Appropriation Language Changes
General Provision Changes
The judiciary proposed new language in the following
general provisions:
New Section 307: The proposed language would allow federal
judges to receive the same automatic annual cost-of-living
adjustments, currently authorized by section 461 of title 28 of
the United States Code, that members of Congress are
authorized to receive.
The judiciary proposes re-authorization or extension of the
following general provisions:
Section 305: The proposed language would continue to give the
Judicial Branch the same authority as the Executive Branch to
contract directly for space alteration projects not exceeding
$100,000 without having to go through GSA.
8
Judiciary Appropriation Funding ($000)
Appropriation Account
Mandatoryl
DiscretionarY
FY 2011 Request
FY 2010 Available
FY 2009 Actual
Mandatoryl
Total
Discretionary
Total
Mandatory
Discretionary'
Total
U.S. Supreme Court
.....~~,~ri~.~..¥~P.,,~~~............................... .............gtU.9._ ...............~~7.t~~~_ ............~~9.17.7.7. ... _..........g.~.§.§._ .............'$.7.~.&§.!L .........rt.~t9.~.~ ...........J.~t!n __ .........$.7.?,?~L ....... ~:nl~~
Care of the Building and
Grounds
U. S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit
U.S. Court oflnternational Trade
Courts of Appeals, District Courts &
Other Judicial Services
Salaries & Expenses Direct
Vaccine Injury Trust Fund
$0
$18.447
$18447
$0
S14.525
$14.525
SO
S14788
$14788
$2356
$1696
S28028
$17909
$30384
S19.605
$2491
$1.715
$30069
$19.635
$32,560
$21.350
$2.502
$1851
$33.357
$20417
$35.859
$22.268
$323,911
SO
$4,487,458
S4,253
$4,811,369
$4,253
$340,000
SO
$4,671,018
$5,428
$5,011,018
$5,428
$332,565
$0
$4,977,216
$4,785
$5,309,781
54,785
.............$.!!!M.~~.!1:mf.!i.¥.~lJ§g~.rp.M.... _... .........$.~?:~,?1.~._ ..........$.~M?1.,7.U._ ......~~M!~,§.n ...........$.~~~M~9.9._ ........$.~,§.7.§.,~§._ ....$.?,9.~.§.~~§. .......$.~~~,?§.L ....M,?~,J.~.~ .... ~~~;Hff,~§§
Services ......................... ........ ..
.....Defender
.................................
'
-
-
.... .¥.~~.~~:!.':I.~C!.':!.~.~~p.~i:!~.~?!!~~~ .........
.....~?~!!.~~.~!'!~.......................................
.................... ~~- .•..•..•. .•..~~~~~~~~- .........~~~!~~~ ...... -..............~~- ........... ~???!?~~- .......~???!?~~ ..................~~_ ......~~.~~~~.t~.?L ..~.~,9.~.~,!.?~
....................~~- ...............~~~~~~~- ...........~~~~~~~ ......................~~- .............~?~.!~?~.- .........~~~!~~~• . .................~~_ ...........~~~t.l.~~" .......~.~!.~~~
................ _..~~_ .............~~~~>.~?L ........~~~~t~?~ ......................~~_ ...........~~?~.l~~?_ .......~~?~l~~? ..................~~_ .........~~~?!~~~ ....... ~~?~,~~~
5340,000
S6,168,662
S6,156,086
S83,075
$0
579,049
$27,328
$25,725
$0
$82,374
$0
576,140
S76,140
SO
$16,225
$16,225
$0
$16,837
SO
$428,746
$6,426,571
Direct
$406,222
$6,080,963
$6,487,185
$4,253
Vaccine Injury Trust Fund
$5,428
$0
$4,253
$0
$6,491,438
$428,746
$6,431,999
Total
5406,222
$6,085,216
I For FY 2009, the enacted mandatory level is $406,222 and the actual mandatory level is $402,103.
2 FY 2009 discretionary appropriations includes $10.0 million in the Salaries and Expenses total in emergency appropriations from
3 FY 2010 mandatory amounts reflect the enacted appropriation level.
4 FY 2011 discretionary amounts include a fiscal year 2011 cost-of-living adjustment for judges.
Subtotal, CADCOJS
Administrative Office ofthe U.S. Courts
Federal Judicial Center
Judiciary Retirement Funds
U.S. Sentencing Commission
5323,911
$0
$0
$5,832,175
$79,049
S25,725
- - -
9
$6,508,662
$83,075
$27,328
$82,374
$16,837
$6,855,317
$5,428
$6,860,745
5332,565
$0
SO
$90,361
$0
$429,476
$0
$429,476
the War Supplemental.
$6,622,454
$87,255
$28,694
$0
56,954,907
$87,255
$28,694
$90,361
517,595
$6,895,224
$4,785
$6,900,009
$17,595
$7,324,700
$4,785
$7,329,485
The Judiciary
Summary of FfE
Appropriation
I
Increase over
FY 2010
FY 2011
Request
FY 2010
Available
FY 2009
Actual
I
!
Supreme Court
523
533
543
Salaries and Expenses
480
485
494
Building and Grounds
43
48
49
1
142
154
163
9
76
80
80
0
32,185
33,009
34,123
1,114
29,569
30,203
31,201
998
2,568
2,736
2,849
113
0
0
0
0
48
70
73
3
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
631
639
641
2
Federal Judicial Center
141
138
140
2
0
0
0
0
103
110
110
0
33,801
34,663
35,800
1,137
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Court of International Trade
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and other
Judicial Services
Salaries and Expenses
Defender Services
Fees ofJurors & Commissioners
Court Security
Judicial Retirement Funds
United States Sentencing Commission
Total, Judiciary!
1
The Judiciary totals do not reflect reimbursable positions (277 in FY 2009; 283 in FY 2010; and 286 in FY 2011).
10
10
I
I
91
1
IT 2011 Swn... ry .rRequosted Clutag..
Supreme
rr[
FY 20 I0 Enaacd Approprialion
FY 20 10 Vaa:ine Injwy Trust fund
IT ZOIO A•• U.blo Appropri.Uon
Court
(SOOO)
F
