[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 117 (Friday, August 1, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Page S10912]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 1561. A bill to preserve existing judgeships on the Superior Court 
of the District of Columbia; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill 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 
Durbin.
  The Superior Court is the local court of general jurisdiction 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. They 
narrow the possible number of candidates to three and send those three 
names to the President. The President then selects one of those three 
candidates to nominate and sends the nominee to the Senate for 
confirmation. Existing law caps the total number of judges on the 
Superior Court at 59.
  Recently, I was informed that nominations, currently pending in the 
Committee on 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 
last 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.
  Because of this, the Governmental Affairs Committee currently has 
four nominations pending for the Superior Court, but only two seats 
left to fill. I also understand that there is yet another nomination 
expected in the coming months. Because existing law sets strict 
requirements on both the D.C. 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. Nor is it clear as to whether, had 
they known of this problem, they would have had the power to not make 
the nominations they have already made.
  This is a highly unusual situation. Mr. President, 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 D.C. 
Family Court Act was enacted. Instead, this would preserve existing 
seats on the Court and remedy a problem that is effecting 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 in increased judicial case-load and 
delays at the Courthouse.
                                 ______