[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 157 (Sunday, November 9, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12421-S12422]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                FEDERAL JUDICIARY PROTECTION ACT OF 1997

  Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of Calendar No. 203, S. 1189.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1189) to increase the criminal penalties for 
     assaulting or threatening Federal judges, their family 
     members, and other public servants, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate 
consideration of the bill?
  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.


                           Amendment No. 1624

(Purpose: To increase the maximum term of imprisonment for assaulting, 
         resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees)

  Mr. SESSIONS. There is an amendment at the desk submitted by Senator 
Feinstein, and I ask for its consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alabama [Mr. Sessions], for Mrs. 
     Feinstein, proposes an amendment numbered 1624.

  Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 2, line 6, strike ``8'' and insert ``12''.

  Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent the amendment be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 1624) was agreed to.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I delighted that the Senate is about to 
pass the Federal Judiciary Protection Act of 1997, S. 1189. I am a 
proud cosponsor of this legislation.
  This legislation would provide greater protection to Federal judges, 
law enforcement officers and their families. Specifically, our 
legislation would: increase the maximum prison term for forcible 
assaults, resistance, opposition, intimidation or interference with a 
Federal judge or law enforcement officer from 3 years imprisonment to 8 
years; increase the maximum prison term for use of a deadly weapon or 
infliction of bodily injury against a Federal judge or law enforcement 
officer from 10 years imprisonment to 20 years; and increase the 
maximum prison term for threatening murder or kidnaping of a member of 
the immediate family of a Federal judge or law enforcement officer from 
5 years imprisonment to 10 years. It has the support of the Department 
of Justice, the United States Judicial Conference, the United States 
Sentencing Commission and the United States Marshal Service.
  It is most troubling that the greatest democracy in the world needs 
this legislation to protect the hard working men and women who serve in 
our Federal judiciary and other law enforcement agencies. But, 
unfortunately, we are seeing more violence and threats of violence 
against officials of our Federal government.
  Earlier this year, for example, a courtroom in Urbana, Illinois was 
firebombed, apparently by a disgruntled litigant. This follows the 
horrible tragedy of the bombing of the federal office building in 
Oklahoma City two years ago. More recently in my home state, a Vermont 
border patrol officer, John Pfeiffer, was seriously wounded by Carl 
Drega, during a shootout with Vermont and New Hampshire law enforcement 
officers in which Drega lost his life. Earlier that day, Drega shot and 
killed two state troopers and a local judge in New Hampshire. 
Apparently, Drega was bent on settling a grudge against the judge who 
had ruled against him in a land dispute.
  I had a chance to visit John Pfeiffer in the hospital and met his 
wife and young daughter. Thankfully, Agent Pfeiffer has returned to 
work along the Vermont border. As a federal law enforcement officer, 
Agent Pfeiffer and his family will receive greater protection under our 
bill.
  There is, of course, no excuse or justification for someone taking 
the law into their own hands and attacking or threatening a judge or 
law enforcement officer. Still, the U.S. Marshal Service is concerned 
with more and more threats of harm to our judges and law enforcement 
officers.
  The extreme rhetoric that some are using to attack the judiciary only 
feeds into this hysteria. For example, one of the Republican leaders in 
the House of Representatives was recently quoted as saying: ``The 
judges need to be intimidated,'' and if they do not behave, ``we're 
going to go after them in a big way.'' I know that House Republican 
Whip Tom DeLay was not intending to encourage violence against any 
Federal official, but this extreme rhetoric only serves to degrade 
Federal judges in the eyes of the public.
  Let none of us in the Congress contribute to the atmosphere of hate 
and violence. Let us treat the judicial branch and those who serve 
within it with the respect that is essential to its preserving its 
public standing.
  We have the greatest judicial system in the world, the envy of people 
and countries around the world that are struggling for freedom. It is 
the independence of our third, co-equal branch of government that gives 
it the ability to act fairly and impartially. It is our judiciary that 
has for so long protected our fundamental rights and freedoms and 
served as a necessary check on overreaching by the other two branches, 
those more susceptible to the gusts of the political winds of the 
moment.
  We are fortunate to have dedicated women and men throughout the 
Federal Judiciary and law enforcement in this country who do a 
tremendous job under difficult circumstances. They are examples of the 
hard-working public servants that make up the federal government, who 
are too often maligned and unfairly disparaged. It is unfortunate that 
it takes acts or threats of violence to put a human face on the Federal 
Judiciary and other law enforcement officials, to remind everyone that 
these are people with children and parents and cousins and friends. 
They deserve our respect and our protection.

[[Page S12422]]

  Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous consent that the bill, as amended, be 
deemed read the third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid 
upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be printed 
in the Record.
  The bill (S. 1189), as amended, was deemed read the third time and 
passed, as follows:

                                S. 1189

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Judiciary Protection 
     Act of 1997''.

     SEC. 2. ASSAULTING, RESISTING, OR IMPEDING CERTAIN OFFICERS 
                   OR EMPLOYEES.

       Section 111 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``three'' and inserting 
     ``12''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``ten'' and inserting 
     ``20''.

     SEC. 3. INFLUENCING, IMPEDING, OR RETALIATING AGAINST A 
                   FEDERAL OFFICIAL BY THREATENING OR INJURING A 
                   FAMILY MEMBER.

       Section 115(b)(4) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``five'' and inserting ``10''; and
       (2) by striking ``three'' and inserting ``6''.

     SEC. 4. MAILING THREATENING COMMUNICATIONS.

       Section 876 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by designating the first 4 undesignated paragraphs as 
     subsections (a) through (d), respectively;
       (2) in subsection (c), as so designated, by adding at the 
     end the following: ``If such a communication is addressed to 
     a United States judge, a Federal law enforcement officer, or 
     an official who is covered by section 1114, the individual 
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 
     years, or both.''; and
       (3) in subsection (d), as so designated, by adding at the 
     end the following: ``If such a communication is addressed to 
     a United States judge, a Federal law enforcement officer, or 
     an official who is covered by section 1114, the individual 
     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 
     years, or both.''.

     SEC. 5. AMENDMENT OF THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES FOR ASSAULTS 
                   AND THREATS AGAINST FEDERAL JUDGES AND CERTAIN 
                   OTHER FEDERAL OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES.

       (a) In General.--Pursuant to its authority under section 
     994 of title 28, United States Code, the United States 
     Sentencing Commission shall review and amend the Federal 
     sentencing guidelines and the policy statements of the 
     commission, if appropriate, to provide an appropriate 
     sentencing enhancement for offenses involving influencing, 
     assaulting, resisting, impeding, retaliating against, or 
     threatening a Federal judge, magistrate judge, or any other 
     official described in section 111 or 115 of title 18, United 
     States Code.
       (b) Factors for Consideration.--In carrying out this 
     section, the United States Sentencing Commission shall 
     consider, with respect to each offense described in 
     subsection (a)--
       (1) any expression of congressional intent regarding the 
     appropriate penalties for the offense;
       (2) the range of conduct covered by the offense;
       (3) the existing sentences for the offense;
       (4) the extent to which sentencing enhancements within the 
     Federal sentencing guidelines and the court's authority to 
     impose a sentence in excess of the applicable guideline range 
     are adequate to ensure punishment at or near the maximum 
     penalty for the most egregious conduct covered by the 
     offense;
       (5) the extent to which Federal sentencing guideline 
     sentences for the offense have been constrained by statutory 
     maximum penalties;
       (6) the extent to which Federal sentencing guidelines for 
     the offense adequately achieve the purposes of sentencing as 
     set forth in section 3553(a)(2) of title 18, United States 
     Code;
       (7) the relationship of Federal sentencing guidelines for 
     the offense to the Federal sentencing guidelines for other 
     offenses of comparable seriousness; and
       (8) any other factors that the Commission considers to be 
     appropriate.

                          ____________________