[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 10]
[House]
[Pages 13747-13751]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1445
                   JUDICIAL IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2002

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 3892) to amend title 28, United States Code, to make 
certain modifications in the judicial discipline procedures, and for 
other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 3892

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

[[Page 13748]]



     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Judicial Improvements Act of 
     2002''.

     SEC. 2. JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES.

       (a) In General.--Part I of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after chapter 15 the following new 
     chapter:

    ``CHAPTER 16--COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE

``Sec.
``351. Complaints; judge defined.
``352. Review of complaint by chief judge.
``353. Special committees.
``354. Action by judicial council.
``355. Action by Judicial Conference.
``356. Subpoena power.
``357. Review of orders and actions.
``358. Rules.
``359. Restrictions.
``360. Disclosure of information.
``361. Reimbursement of expenses.
``362. Other provisions and rules not affected.
``363. Court of Federal Claims, Court of International Trade, Court of 
              Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
``364. Effect of felony conviction.

     ``Sec. 351. Complaints; judge defined

       ``(a) Filing of Complaint by Any Person.--Any person 
     alleging that a judge has engaged in conduct prejudicial to 
     the effective and expeditious administration of the business 
     of the courts, or alleging that such judge is unable to 
     discharge all the duties of office by reason of mental or 
     physical disability, may file with the clerk of the court of 
     appeals for the circuit a written complaint containing a 
     brief statement of the facts constituting such conduct.
       ``(b) Identifying Complaint by Chief Judge.--In the 
     interests of the effective and expeditious administration of 
     the business of the courts and on the basis of information 
     available to the chief judge of the circuit, the chief judge 
     may, by written order stating reasons therefor, identify a 
     complaint for purposes of this chapter and thereby dispense 
     with filing of a written complaint.
       ``(c) Transmittal of Complaint.--Upon receipt of a 
     complaint filed under subsection (a), the clerk shall 
     promptly transmit the complaint to the chief judge of the 
     circuit, or, if the conduct complained of is that of the 
     chief judge, to that circuit judge in regular active service 
     next senior in date of commission (hereafter, for purposes of 
     this chapter only, included in the term `chief judge'). The 
     clerk shall simultaneously transmit a copy of the complaint 
     to the judge whose conduct is the subject of the complaint. 
     The clerk shall also transmit a copy of any complaint 
     identified under subsection (b) to the judge whose conduct is 
     the subject of the complaint.
       ``(d) Definitions.--In this chapter--
       ``(1) the term `judge' means a circuit judge, district 
     judge, bankruptcy judge, or magistrate judge; and
       ``(2) the term `complainant' means the person filing a 
     complaint under subsection (a) of this section.

     ``Sec. 352. Review of complaint by chief judge

       ``(a) Expeditious Review; Limited Inquiry.--The chief judge 
     shall expeditiously review any complaint received under 
     section 351(a) or identified under section 351(b). In 
     determining what action to take, the chief judge may conduct 
     a limited inquiry for the purpose of determining--
       ``(1) whether appropriate corrective action has been or can 
     be taken without the necessity for a formal investigation; 
     and
       ``(2) whether the facts stated in the complaint are either 
     plainly untrue or are incapable of being established through 
     investigation.
     For this purpose, the chief judge may request the judge whose 
     conduct is complained of to file a written response to the 
     complaint. Such response shall not be made available to the 
     complainant unless authorized by the judge filing the 
     response. The chief judge or his or her designee may also 
     communicate orally or in writing with the complainant, the 
     judge whose conduct is complained of, and any other person 
     who may have knowledge of the matter, and may review any 
     transcripts or other relevant documents. The chief judge 
     shall not undertake to make findings of fact about any matter 
     that is reasonably in dispute.
       ``(b) Action by Chief Judge Following Review.--After 
     expeditiously reviewing a complaint under subsection (a), the 
     chief judge, by written order stating his or her reasons, 
     may--
       ``(1) dismiss the complaint--
       ``(A) if the chief judge finds the complaint to be--
       ``(i) not in conformity with section 351(a);
       ``(ii) directly related to the merits of a decision or 
     procedural ruling; or
       ``(iii) frivolous, lacking sufficient evidence to raise an 
     inference that misconduct has occurred, or containing 
     allegations which are incapable of being established through 
     investigation; or
       ``(B) when a limited inquiry conducted under subsection (a) 
     demonstrates that the allegations in the complaint lack any 
     factual foundation or are conclusively refuted by objective 
     evidence; or
       ``(2) conclude the proceeding if the chief judge finds that 
     appropriate corrective action has been taken or that action 
     on the complaint is no longer necessary because of 
     intervening events.
     The chief judge shall transmit copies of the written order to 
     the complainant and to the judge whose conduct is the subject 
     of the complaint.
       ``(c) Review of Orders of Chief Judge.--A complainant or 
     judge aggrieved by a final order of the chief judge under 
     this section may petition the judicial council of the circuit 
     for review thereof. The denial of a petition for review of 
     the chief judge's order shall be final and conclusive and 
     shall not be judicially reviewable on appeal or otherwise.
       ``(d) Referral of Petitions for Review to Panels of the 
     Judicial Council.--Each judicial council may, pursuant to 
     rules prescribed under section 358, refer a petition for 
     review filed under subsection (c) to a panel of no fewer than 
     5 members of the council, at least 2 of whom shall be 
     district judges.

     ``Sec. 353. Special committees

       ``(a) Appointment.--If the chief judge does not enter an 
     order under section 352(b), the chief judge shall promptly--
       ``(1) appoint himself or herself and equal numbers of 
     circuit and district judges of the circuit to a special 
     committee to investigate the facts and allegations contained 
     in the complaint;
       ``(2) certify the complaint and any other documents 
     pertaining thereto to each member of such committee; and
       ``(3) provide written notice to the complainant and the 
     judge whose conduct is the subject of the complaint of the 
     action taken under this subsection.
       ``(b) Change in Status or Death of Judges.--A judge 
     appointed to a special committee under subsection (a) may 
     continue to serve on that committee after becoming a senior 
     judge or, in the case of the chief judge of the circuit, 
     after his or her term as chief judge terminates under 
     subsection (a)(3) or (c) of section 45. If a judge appointed 
     to a committee under subsection (a) dies, or retires from 
     office under section 371(a), while serving on the committee, 
     the chief judge of the circuit may appoint another circuit or 
     district judge, as the case may be, to the committee.
       ``(c) Investigation by Special Committee.--Each committee 
     appointed under subsection (a) shall conduct an investigation 
     as extensive as it considers necessary, and shall 
     expeditiously file a comprehensive written report thereon 
     with the judicial council of the circuit. Such report shall 
     present both the findings of the investigation and the 
     committee's recommendations for necessary and appropriate 
     action by the judicial council of the circuit.

     ``Sec. 354. Action by judicial council

       ``(a) Actions Upon Receipt of Report.--
       ``(1) Actions.--The judicial council of a circuit, upon 
     receipt of a report filed under section 353(c)--
       ``(A) may conduct any additional investigation which it 
     considers to be necessary;
       ``(B) may dismiss the complaint; and
       ``(C) if the complaint is not dismissed, shall take such 
     action as is appropriate to assure the effective and 
     expeditious administration of the business of the courts 
     within the circuit.
       ``(2) Description of possible actions if complaint not 
     dismissed.--
       ``(A) In general.--Action by the judicial council under 
     paragraph (1)(C) may include--
       ``(i) ordering that, on a temporary basis for a time 
     certain, no further cases be assigned to the judge whose 
     conduct is the subject of a complaint;
       ``(ii) censuring or reprimanding such judge by means of 
     private communication; and
       ``(iii) censuring or reprimanding such judge by means of 
     public announcement.
       ``(B) For article iii judges.--If the conduct of a judge 
     appointed to hold office during good behavior is the subject 
     of the complaint, action by the judicial council under 
     paragraph (1)(C) may include--
       ``(i) certifying disability of the judge pursuant to the 
     procedures and standards provided under section 372(b); and
       ``(ii) requesting that the judge voluntarily retire, with 
     the provision that the length of service requirements under 
     section 371 of this title shall not apply.
       ``(C) For magistrate judges.--If the conduct of a 
     magistrate judge is the subject of the complaint, action by 
     the judicial council under paragraph (1)(C) may include 
     directing the chief judge of the district of the magistrate 
     judge to take such action as the judicial council considers 
     appropriate.
       ``(3) Limitations on judicial council regarding removals.--
       ``(A) Article iii judges.--Under no circumstances may the 
     judicial council order removal from office of any judge 
     appointed to hold office during good behavior.
       ``(B) Magistrate and bankruptcy judges.--Any removal of a 
     magistrate judge under this subsection shall be in accordance 
     with section 631 and any removal of a bankruptcy judge shall 
     be in accordance with section 152.
       ``(4) Notice of action to judge.--The judicial council 
     shall immediately provide written notice to the complainant 
     and to the judge whose conduct is the subject of the 
     complaint of the action taken under this subsection.
       ``(b) Referral to Judicial Conference.--
       ``(1) In general.--In addition to the authority granted 
     under subsection (a), the judicial council may, in its 
     discretion, refer any complaint under section 351, together 
     with the record of any associated proceedings and its 
     recommendations for appropriate action, to the Judicial 
     Conference of the United States.
       ``(2) Special circumstances.--In any case in which the 
     judicial council determines, on the basis of a complaint and 
     an investigation under this chapter, or on the basis of 
     information otherwise available to the judicial council, that 
     a judge appointed to hold office during good behavior may 
     have engaged in conduct--
       ``(A) which might constitute one or more grounds for 
     impeachment under article II of the Constitution, or

[[Page 13749]]

       ``(B) which, in the interest of justice, is not amenable to 
     resolution by the judicial council, the judicial council 
     shall promptly certify such determination, together with any 
     complaint and a record of any associated proceedings, to the 
     Judicial Conference of the United States.
       ``(3) Notice to complainant and judge.--A judicial council 
     acting under authority of this subsection shall, unless 
     contrary to the interests of justice, immediately submit 
     written notice to the complainant and to the judge whose 
     conduct is the subject of the action taken under this 
     subsection.

     ``Sec. 355. Action by Judicial Conference

       ``(a) In General.--Upon referral or certification of any 
     matter under section 354(b), the Judicial Conference, after 
     consideration of the prior proceedings and such additional 
     investigation as it considers appropriate, shall by majority 
     vote take such action, as described in section 354(a)(1)(C) 
     and (2), as it considers appropriate.
       ``(b) If Impeachment Warranted.--
       ``(1) In general.--If the Judicial Conference concurs in 
     the determination of the judicial council, or makes its own 
     determination, that consideration of impeachment may be 
     warranted, it shall so certify and transmit the determination 
     and the record of proceedings to the House of Representatives 
     for whatever action the House of Representatives considers to 
     be necessary. Upon receipt of the determination and record of 
     proceedings in the House of Representatives, the Clerk of the 
     House of Representatives shall make available to the public 
     the determination and any reasons for the determination.
       ``(2) In case of felony conviction.--If a judge has been 
     convicted of a felony under State or Federal law and has 
     exhausted all means of obtaining direct review of the 
     conviction, or the time for seeking further direct review of 
     the conviction has passed and no such review has been sought, 
     the Judicial Conference may, by majority vote and without 
     referral or certification under section 354(b), transmit to 
     the House of Representatives a determination that 
     consideration of impeachment may be warranted, together with 
     appropriate court records, for whatever action the House of 
     Representatives considers to be necessary.

     ``Sec. 356. Subpoena power

       ``(a) Judicial Councils and Special Committees.--In 
     conducting any investigation under this chapter, the judicial 
     council, or a special committee appointed under section 353, 
     shall have full subpoena powers as provided in section 
     332(d).
       ``(b) Judicial Conference and Standing Committees.--In 
     conducting any investigation under this chapter, the Judicial 
     Conference, or a standing committee appointed by the Chief 
     Justice under section 331, shall have full subpoena powers as 
     provided in that section.

     ``Sec. 357. Review of orders and actions

       ``(a) Review of Action of Judicial Council.--A complainant 
     or judge aggrieved by an action of the judicial council under 
     section 354 may petition the Judicial Conference of the 
     United States for review thereof.
       ``(b) Action of Judicial Conference.--The Judicial 
     Conference, or the standing committee established under 
     section 331, may grant a petition filed by a complainant or 
     judge under subsection (a).
       ``(c) No Judicial Review.--Except as expressly provided in 
     this section and section 352(c), all orders and 
     determinations, including denials of petitions for review, 
     shall be final and conclusive and shall not be judicially 
     reviewable on appeal or otherwise.

     ``Sec. 358. Rules

       ``(a) In General.--Each judicial council and the Judicial 
     Conference may prescribe such rules for the conduct of 
     proceedings under this chapter, including the processing of 
     petitions for review, as each considers to be appropriate.
       ``(b) Required Provisions.--Rules prescribed under 
     subsection (a) shall contain provisions requiring that--
       ``(1) adequate prior notice of any investigation be given 
     in writing to the judge whose conduct is the subject of a 
     complaint under this chapter;
       ``(2) the judge whose conduct is the subject of a complaint 
     under this chapter be afforded an opportunity to appear (in 
     person or by counsel) at proceedings conducted by the 
     investigating panel, to present oral and documentary 
     evidence, to compel the attendance of witnesses or the 
     production of documents, to cross-examine witnesses, and to 
     present argument orally or in writing; and
       ``(3) the complainant be afforded an opportunity to appear 
     at proceedings conducted by the investigating panel, if the 
     panel concludes that the complainant could offer substantial 
     information.
       ``(c) Procedures.--Any rule prescribed under this section 
     shall be made or amended only after giving appropriate public 
     notice and an opportunity for comment. Any such rule shall be 
     a matter of public record, and any such rule promulgated by a 
     judicial council may be modified by the Judicial Conference. 
     No rule promulgated under this section may limit the period 
     of time within which a person may file a complaint under this 
     chapter.

     ``Sec. 359. Restrictions

       ``(a) Restriction on Individuals Who Are Subject of 
     Investigation.--No judge whose conduct is the subject of an 
     investigation under this chapter shall serve upon a special 
     committee appointed under section 353, upon a judicial 
     council, upon the Judicial Conference, or upon the standing 
     committee established under section 331, until all 
     proceedings under this chapter relating to such investigation 
     have been finally terminated.
       ``(b) Amicus Curiae.--No person shall be granted the right 
     to intervene or to appear as amicus curiae in any proceeding 
     before a judicial council or the Judicial Conference under 
     this chapter.

     ``Sec. 360. Disclosure of information

       ``(a) Confidentiality of Proceedings.--Except as provided 
     in section 355, all papers, documents, and records of 
     proceedings related to investigations conducted under this 
     chapter shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed by 
     any person in any proceeding except to the extent that--
       ``(1) the judicial council of the circuit in its discretion 
     releases a copy of a report of a special committee under 
     section 353(c) to the complainant whose complaint initiated 
     the investigation by that special committee and to the judge 
     whose conduct is the subject of the complaint;
       ``(2) the judicial council of the circuit, the Judicial 
     Conference of the United States, or the Senate or the House 
     of Representatives by resolution, releases any such material 
     which is believed necessary to an impeachment investigation 
     or trial of a judge under article I of the Constitution; or
       ``(3) such disclosure is authorized in writing by the judge 
     who is the subject of the complaint and by the chief judge of 
     the circuit, the Chief Justice, or the chairman of the 
     standing committee established under section 331.
       ``(b) Public Availability of Written Orders.--Each written 
     order to implement any action under section 354(a)(1)(C), 
     which is issued by a judicial council, the Judicial 
     Conference, or the standing committee established under 
     section 331, shall be made available to the public through 
     the appropriate clerk's office of the court of appeals for 
     the circuit. Unless contrary to the interests of justice, 
     each such order shall be accompanied by written reasons 
     therefor.

     ``Sec. 361. Reimbursement of expenses

       ``Upon the request of a judge whose conduct is the subject 
     of a complaint under this chapter, the judicial council may, 
     if the complaint has been finally dismissed under section 
     354(a)(1)(B), recommend that the Director of the 
     Administrative Office of the United States Courts award 
     reimbursement, from funds appropriated to the Federal 
     judiciary, for those reasonable expenses, including 
     attorneys' fees, incurred by that judge during the 
     investigation which would not have been incurred but for the 
     requirements of this chapter.

     ``Sec. 362. Other provisions and rules not affected

       ``Except as expressly provided in this chapter, nothing in 
     this chapter shall be construed to affect any other provision 
     of this title, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the 
     Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Federal Rules of 
     Appellate Procedure, or the Federal Rules of Evidence.

     ``Sec. 363. Court of Federal Claims, Court of International 
       Trade, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

       ``The United States Court of Federal Claims, the Court of 
     International Trade, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal 
     Circuit shall each prescribe rules, consistent with the 
     provisions of this chapter, establishing procedures for the 
     filing of complaints with respect to the conduct of any judge 
     of such court and for the investigation and resolution of 
     such complaints. In investigating and taking action with 
     respect to any such complaint, each such court shall have the 
     powers granted to a judicial council under this chapter.

     ``Sec. 364. Effect of felony conviction

       ``In the case of any judge or judge of a court referred to 
     in section 363 who is convicted of a felony under State or 
     Federal law and has exhausted all means of obtaining direct 
     review of the conviction, or the time for seeking further 
     direct review of the conviction has passed and no such review 
     has been sought, that judge shall not hear cases unless the 
     judicial council of the circuit (or, in the case of a judge 
     of a court referred to in section 363, that court) determines 
     otherwise.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of chapters for part I 
     of title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to chapter 15 the following new item:

``16. Complaints against judges and judicial discipline..........351''.

     SEC. 3. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Retirement for Disability.--(1) Section 372 of title 
     28, United States Code, is amended--
       (A) in the section caption by striking ``; judicial 
     discipline''; and
       (B) by striking subsection (c).
       (2) The item relating to section 372 in the table of 
     sections for chapter 17 of title 28, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking ``; judicial discipline''.
       (b) Judicial Conference.--Section 331 of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended in the fourth undesignated paragraph 
     by striking ``section 372(c)'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``chapter 16''.
       (c) Judicial Councils.--Section 332 of title 28, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d)(2)--
       (A) by striking ``section 372(c) of this title'' and 
     inserting ``chapter 16 of this title''; and
       (B) by striking ``372(c)(4)'' and inserting ``353''; and
       (2) by striking the second subsection designated as 
     subsection (h).
       (d) Recall of Bankruptcy Judges and Magistrate Judges.--
     Section 375(d) of title 28,

[[Page 13750]]

     United States Code, is amended by striking ``section 372(c)'' 
     and inserting ``chapter 16''.
       (e) Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
     States Courts.--Section 604 of title 28, United States Code, 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(20)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``372(c)(11)'' and 
     inserting ``358''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``372(c)(15)'' and 
     inserting ``360(b)''; and
       (2) in subsection (h)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``section 372'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``chapter 16''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``section 372(c)'' and 
     inserting ``chapter 16''.
       (f) Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.--Section 7253(g) 
     of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``section 372(c)'' and inserting ``chapter 
     16''; and
       (B) by striking ``such section'' and inserting ``such 
     chapter'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``paragraphs (7) 
     through (15) of section 372(c)'' and inserting ``sections 
     354(b) through 360''; and
       (B) in the second sentence, by striking ``paragraph (7) or 
     (8) of section 372(c)'' and inserting ``section 354(b) or 
     355''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``372(c)(16)'' and 
     inserting ``361''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Stearns). Pursuant to the rule, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend 
their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3892 currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3892 constitutes a noncontroversial fine-tuning of 
an existing statute, the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980, 
which permits individuals to file complaints against Federal judges for 
inappropriate behavior.
  The legislation before us will reorganize the 1980 act by recodifying 
it as a new chapter of title 28, United States Code, thereby making it 
easier to locate and use. The bill will also clarify the 
responsibilities of a circuit chief judge in making the initial 
evaluations of a complaint, will specifically empower a judicial 
council to refer a complaint to a smaller panel for greater scrutiny. 
These changes will not only assist the Federal judiciary in discharging 
its responsibilities under the 1980 act, they will enable an individual 
to understand more fully the reasoning behind the disposition of a 
complaint.
  Mr. Speaker, the Committee on the Judiciary believes that the 1980 
act works well in most instances but could work better. We have 
developed this bill with full participation of the minority, and I urge 
my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3892, the Judicial 
Improvements Act of 2002. H.R. 3892 makes slight modifications to 
existing Federal judicial misconduct statutes. These statutes govern 
the methods and procedures through which a complaint against a Federal 
judge is filed and evaluated.
  H.R. 3892 improves the statutes of both the judiciary and the 
complainant. H.R. 3892 clarifies how chief judges should evaluate 
complaints while enabling a complainant to receive a fair and 
expeditious review of his or her complaint. Specifically, H.R. 3892 
accomplishes four primary goals. H.R. 3892 creates a new chapter to 
house the misconduct statutes, better organized and more convenient 
than before. Second, it recognizes the authority of a chief judge to 
conduct a limited inquiry into a complaint against a Federal judge to 
evaluate the merit of the complaint. Third, H.R. 3892 specifies 
additional valid criteria for a dismissal of a complaint. Finally, it 
permits a subset of the judicial council to evaluate a complainant's 
appeal rather than the full council.
  I believe that is the right direction to assist our Federal 
judiciary, which I know wants to be on top of the rules and in front of 
the rules, to do their jobs and to monitor their own conduct.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3892, the Judicial 
Improvements Act of 2002.
  H.R. 3892 makes slight modifications to existing federal judicial 
misconduct statutes. These statutes govern the methods and procedures 
through which a complaint against a federal judge is filed and 
evaluated.
  H.R. 3892 improves these statutes for both the judiciary and the 
complainant. H.R. 3892 clarifies how chief judges should evaluate 
complaints, while enabling a complainant to receive a fair and 
expeditious review of his or her complaint.
  Specifically, H.R. 3892 accomplishes four primary goals.
  First, H.R. 3892 creates a new chapter to house the misconduct 
statutes, better organized and more convenient than before.
  Second, it recognizes the authority of a chief judge to conduct a 
limited inquiry into a complaint against a federal judge, to evaluate 
the merit of the complaint.
  Third, H.R. 3892 specifies additional valid criteria for a dismissal 
of a complaint.
  Finally, it permits a subset of the judicial council to evaluate a 
complainant's appeal, rather than the full council.
  This legislation is the outcome of the Subcommittee on Courts, the 
Internet, and Intellectual Property oversight hearing held in November 
2001 on judicial misconduct and recusal.
  The reorganization and clarifications in this bill were discussed and 
supported by the witnesses at that hearing. H.R. 3892 was subsequently 
marked up at both the Subcommittee and Committee levels with the full 
support of the Members.
  This legislation helps the judiciary to police itself more 
effectively, and does not impose any additional restrictions or 
external oversight.
  With that, I would ask my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume 
to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).
  Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, the chairman has done a thorough job of describing the 
bill, so I will not rehash his comments. I would say, however, that the 
bill was a bipartisan effort in the making, and I especially want to 
thank the distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), 
the chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary; the distinguished 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member; and the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), who is the 
ranking member on the subcommittee of jurisdiction, for their 
contributions and cooperations.
  In addition to our work on H.R. 3892, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Berman) and I have undertaken two other projects to help improve 
the ethical standing of the judiciary. We have written to the Chief 
Justice asking that the judicial conference consider implementing 
certain administrative changes that should improve the operations of 
the courts; and we have, furthermore, requested that the Federal 
Judicial Center conduct a study of complaint dispositions throughout 
the various circuits. Combined with H.R. 3892, I believe that these 
efforts will assist Federal judges in discharging their ethical 
responsibilities while better informing the Congress as to the 
effectiveness of the judicial misconduct statute which we are amending 
today.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I failed to mention the 
diligent work of the following people who were incredibly helpful in 
the drafting of H.R. 3892: Mr. Arthur Hellman of the Pittsburg School 
of Law, Mr. Mike Remington, the former chief counsel on the 
Subcommittee on the Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property, 
Sandy Strokoff of the Legislative Counsel's Office, as well as the 
Honorable William Osteen, United States District Judge from the middle 
district of North Carolina who appeared as a witness, and who by the 
way, Mr. Speaker, is one of my constituents.

[[Page 13751]]


  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I know that the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) 
would want me to thank the gentleman for his hard work on this 
legislation and to, as well, acknowledge the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for 
their work on this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I do want to note, I want to indicate that this 
legislation is the outcome of the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet 
and Intellectual Property oversight hearing that was held November 2001 
on judicial misconduct and recusal.
  The reorganization and clarifications in this bill were discussed and 
supported by the witnesses at the hearing, and H.R. 3892 was 
subsequently marked up at both the subcommittee and committee levels 
with the full support of the Members. This legislation helps the 
judiciary to police itself more effectively and does not impose 
additional restrictions or external oversight.
  Our committee, though this is not the Subcommittee on Courts for the 
Committee on the Judiciary, and I understand the committee that deals 
with commercial administrative law has had it brought to its attention 
issues dealing with ALJ's as it relates to the responsibility they 
have, in particular, dealing with Social Security Administration 
issues. This kind of even-handed legislation and oversight hearings are 
the kind that I think will give us guidance on how to deal with the 
administrative law judges, and I would look forward in the time to come 
that we would have that opportunity. I support this legislation, and I 
ask my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 3892.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3892, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________