Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS -- (Senate - November 18, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation that would preserve existing seats on the District of Columbia Superior Court. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by Senators VOINOVICH and AKAKA.

The Superior Court is the trail court of general jurisdiction over local matters in the District of Columbia. The associate judges on the court are selected through a two-step review process. When a vacancy on the court occurs, usually because of a retiring judge, the District of Columbia Judicial Nominations Commission solicits applicants to fill the vacancy. The commission narrows the possible number of candidates to three and sends those three names to the President. The President then selects one of those three candidates and sends the nominee to the Senate for confirmation. Existing law caps the total number of judges on the superior court at 59.

Unfortunately, two nominees currently pending in the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and an additional candidate expected to be nominated in the coming months may not be able to be seated on the court even if they are confirmed by the Senate. The three seats that these candidates are intended to fill were left open by retiring judges, so they are not new seats on the court.

The cause of this unusual problem is the District of Columbia Family Court Act, enacted during the 107th Congress. That act created three new seats for the family court, which is a division of the superior court, but failed to increase the overall cap on the number of judges seated on the court. As a result, the Family Court Act effectively eliminated three existing seats in the other divisions of the court, including the criminal and civil divisions.

As a result of this situation, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs currently has two nominations pending for the superior court but no seats left to fill. I also understand that there is yet another nomination expected in the coming months. Since existing law sets strict requirements on both the DC Judicial Nominations Commission as well as the White House on how quickly they must process potential candidates and make a nomination, it is unclear whether they have legal grounds to halt their processes.

This is a highly unusual situation for this body to have nominations pending before it for which there are no open positions. The bill I introduce today would rectify this problem by amending the District of Columbia Code to increase the cap on the number of associate judges on the superior court. This is not intended to create new seats on the Court; that was already done when the DC Family Court Act was enacted. Instead, this would preserve existing seats on the court and remedy a problem that is affecting not only the court but the Senate as well.

I believe that it is also important to not only remedy the immediate problem before the Senate but also to ensure that all of the divisions of the superior court are fully staffed. This is more than just a procedural issue. It is also important for the citizens of the District of Columbia to know that all of the divisions, including criminal and civil, are operating at full capacity. Eliminating existing seats in the criminal and civil divisions will not improve the administration of justice in the District, but can only result an increased judicial caseload and delays at the courthouse.

The legislation I introduce today is similar to legislation that was favorably reported by the Committee on Governmental Affairs and subsequently passed by the Senate by unanimous consent during the 108th Congress. I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this important legislation.

http://thomas.loc.gov/