[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 29764-29767]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        PROVIDING FOR FEDERAL COURT PROCEEDINGS IN PLANO, TEXAS

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the Senate bill (S. 1720) to provide for Federal court proceedings in 
Plano, Texas.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 1720

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

     SECTION 1. CHANGE IN COMPOSITION OF DIVISIONS OF EASTERN 
                   DISTRICT OF TEXAS.

       (a) In General.--Section 124(c) of title 28, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``Denton, and Grayson'' and inserting 
     ``Delta, Denton, Fannin, Grayson, Hopkins, and Lamar''; and
       (B) by inserting ``and Plano'' after ``held at Sherman'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (4) and redesignating paragraphs 
     (5) through (7) as paragraphs (4) through (6), respectively; 
     and
       (3) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by inserting 
     ``Red River,'' after ``Franklin,''.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--This section and the amendments made by 
     this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.
       (2) Pending cases not affected.--This section and the 
     amendments made by this section shall not affect any action 
     commenced before the effective date of this section and 
     pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern 
     District of Texas on such date.
       (3) Juries not affected.--This section and the amendments 
     made by this section shall

[[Page 29765]]

     not affect the composition, or preclude the service, of any 
     grand or petit jury summoned, impaneled, or actually serving 
     in the Eastern Judicial District of Texas on the effective 
     date of this section.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Berman) 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 S. 1720, the Senate 
bill 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.
  Today when I was driving in, I followed a car that had a big bumper 
sticker on it that said ``Don't Mess with Texas,'' and I came to the 
House today with great fear and trepidation that by messing with Texas 
and deciding where the Federal courts will sit, I would be caught in 
the crossfire of a Texas cat fight, and I am happy to report that the 
cats are purring and the Members can mess with Texas and not get in 
trouble by passing this bill.
  Senate 1720 implements the March, 1991, Judicial Conference proposal 
to designate Plano, Texas, as a place for holding court in the Eastern 
District of Texas. It also realigns the divisions of the U.S. District 
Court for the Eastern District of Texas to reflect the closing of the 
courthouse in Denton County. The Paris division is eliminated and its 
counties redistributed among the other divisions of this court.
  Plano is the largest city in the Eastern District of Texas. Of the 93 
judicial districts in the United States, the Eastern District of Texas 
is the only one in which its largest city cannot hold Federal court.
  This is a major impediment to the efficient operations of the Federal 
court system in the Eastern District of Texas. Senate 1720 will greatly 
assist the affected citizens, litigants, lawyers, and judges and also 
will promote the efficient administration of justice.
  The bill is identical to language in section 102 of H.R. 1302, the 
Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2003, which was introduced by the 
chairman and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Courts, the 
Internet, and Intellectual Property. In addition, this Congress has 
passed this exact language on five previous occasions since 1991.
  Following Senate passage of Senate 1720, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Hall) expressed concern that the legislation does not ensure that 
the eastern district caseload will be distributed equally between Plano 
and Sherman. While the judges of the eastern district have unanimously 
agreed to split the docket between Sherman and Plano, this agreement, 
in a signed resolution, is nonbinding.
  I share the concerns of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall). 
Therefore, I support Senate 1720 premised on the understanding that the 
judges of the eastern district will do as they promised by implementing 
a system to assign at least 50 percent of the cases filed in or 
transferred to the Sherman district to a resident district judge 
sitting in the city of Sherman. The remaining 50 percent of the cases 
will be assigned to the Plano court.
  Finally, in response to my request for assurance that the judges' 
agreement will be implemented, the Administrative Office of the U.S. 
Courts has written a letter promising to do whatever is necessary to 
implement this plan. I will insert this letter along with the 
resolution signed by the judges of the Eastern District of Texas into 
the Record. With these assurances, I am sure that we can mess with 
Texas and not get caught in the crossfire.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
                                               Judicial Conference


                                         of the United States,

                                Washington, DC, November 19, 2003.
     Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of 
         Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: I understand that S. 1720, a bill to 
     designate Plano, Texas, will be considered by the House later 
     today. The bill would remedy a serious problem hindering 
     efficient judicial administration in the Eastern District of 
     Texas.
       This bill has the strong support of the Judicial Conference 
     of the United States. As a provision of an omnibus court 
     improvement bill, it has been passed by the House in two 
     previous Congresses, only to remain unacted upon in the 
     Senate.
       The judges of the Eastern District of Texas have formally 
     resolved that half of the Sherman Division caseload will be 
     docketed and tried in Sherman, Texas, and half will be 
     docketed and tried in Plano, Texas. A copy of an order of the 
     court of June 13, 2003, stating this specifically and in some 
     detail is enclosed hereto.
       The Judicial Conference and the court in the Eastern 
     District of Texas are well aware of the concerns of those in 
     Sherman that the judicial business of the division would be 
     largely transferred to Plano. This is not and will not be the 
     case. This issue was considered by the Judicial Conference 
     Committee on Court Administration and Case Management when 
     the proposal was first considered. The resolve of the judges 
     to assure equity to Sherman, Texas, and other factors 
     relating to the great need for a court presence in Plano 
     caused that committee to recommend that the Judicial 
     Conference approve this proposal, which it did.
       I congratulate you and the members of the Judiciary 
     Committee for taking prompt action on this bill which will 
     allow the court to better service the citizens of this region 
     of Texas.
           Sincerely,
                                            Leonidas Ralph Mecham,
                                                        Secretary.
       Enclosure.

                        GENERAL ORDER NO. 03-15

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS


  RESOLUTION REGARDING PLACES OF HOLDING COURT IN THE SHERMAN DIVISION

       Since 1991, both this court and the Judicial Conference of 
     the United States have supported legislation authorizing 
     Plano as a place of holding court in the Sherman Division. 
     Rapid population growth in the Sherman Division over the past 
     decade, particularly in Collin and Denton Counties, 
     underscores the need for an additional court facility. 
     Sherman Division civil and criminal weighted filings over the 
     past five years have grown by 100%. Sherman now has the 
     second heaviest weighted caseload of the six divisions in the 
     Eastern District of Texas.
       In the near future, two resident district judges, a 
     resident magistrate judge and a visiting district judge will 
     be hearing all Sherman Division cases in only two courtrooms. 
     The court has already run out of room in Sherman and needs to 
     acquire additional court facilities in the Division. Having 
     court facilities in both Sherman and Plano will enable the 
     court to better manage the rapidly growing caseload and 
     provide better service to a large population base in southern 
     Collin County.
       It is the court's intention, when a place of holding court 
     in Plano is authorized, to assign the case filings as 
     follows:
       50% civil and criminal cases docketed and tried in Sherman 
     (Judges Brown and Davis).
       50% civil and criminal cases docketed and tried in Plano 
     (Judge Schell).
       In light of the above, the judges of this court hereby 
     REAFFIRM our prior resolution to establish Plano as a place 
     of holding court in the Sherman Division, and RESOLVE, if 
     pending legislation passes that authorizes Plano as a place 
     of holding court, to have half the Sherman Division caseload 
     docketed and tried in Sherman, and the other half of the 
     caseload docketed and tried in Plano. If Judge Brown ceases 
     holding court in Sherman, a new resident judge shall be 
     designated to hold court in Sherman as soon as possible, and 
     pending the new judge's residing in Sherman, 50% of civil and 
     criminal cases shall be docketed and tried in Sherman, and 
     the clerk's office in Sherman shall remain staffed 
     sufficiently to support a resident judge.

     Signed this 13th day of June, 2003.

     For the Court:

     John Hannah, Jr.,
     Chief Judge.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1720 and I ask my colleagues to 
support the bill as well. It is a narrow bill, but a necessary one. It 
is identical to the provisions of the Federal Courts Improvement Act 
currently before the Committee on the Judiciary, and to legislation 
which has I think several times passed the House.
  The purpose of the bill is to allow for Federal court proceedings and 
an additional courthouse in Plano, Texas. As a

[[Page 29766]]

result, the bill will remedy a critical problem hindering the efficient 
judicial administration of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern 
District of Texas.
  The existing courthouse is in Sherman, Texas and is overburdened by 
its increasing caseload. Filings over the past 5 years have grown by 
100 percent. This situation mandates a solution. S. 1720 designates 
Plano as an additional place of holding court to help address this 
expanded workload.
  The one substantive concern about the bill, how cases will be 
distributed between the two courthouses, has been resolved. As I 
understand it, the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary has 
agreed to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished gentleman from 
Texas in which it will become clear that S. 1720 is intended to relieve 
the overflow of filings in the Sherman courthouse, but not do away with 
the Sherman courthouse. I think the chairman has already made that 
clear, that that is his intention.
  Furthermore, there is agreement from the Senate sponsor, the junior 
Senator from Texas, that the civil and criminal case filings for the 
Sherman division will be split 50-50 between the Plano and Sherman 
courthouses. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 
has adopted a resolution memorializing this agreement, and the Judicial 
Conference of the United States has sent a letter to the same effect. 
Finally, the Committee on the Judiciary Report on the Federal Courts 
Improvement Act, which currently contains identical provisions, will 
reflect this understanding. Through these measures, we can rest assured 
that the addition of this courthouse will have no negative impact on 
the Sherman courthouse.
  I appreciate the efforts that my colleagues have made to address the 
concerns of those in Sherman, and I am confident that there is general 
agreement that the judicial business of the Sherman and Plano divisions 
will be shared equally.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support S. 1720.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson).
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman 
yielding me this time. I just want to thank the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) for working 
with us.
  This is a bipartisan agreement. I will let my colleagues know that 
Collin County is expected to increase by 73 percent in population by 
the year 2020, so this is a needed court and long overdue.
  Mr. Speaker, you know, the role of the Federal Government is to serve 
people. And one way the government serves the people is through the 
judicial system.
  Well, the people of Plano, nearly 250,000 strong and the largest city 
in Collin County, do not have access to a nearby Federal court. Simply 
put, today's bill is good legislation that is long overdue. Anytime a 
lawyer wants to file a court paper, they have to drive 48 miles to near 
the Oklahoma border to Sherman, TX. Anytime a police officer needs to 
sign a legal document, they have to drive nearly 100 miles round trip. 
That is not time well spent.
  If the role of the Federal Government is to serve the people, then 
it's time to let Collin County hold court. You know, Plano consumes 
more than three-fourths of the criminal cases in Sherman and nearly 4 
out of 5 civil cases. Clearly there is a need in Plano for a Federal 
bench. The people of Collin County and the Eastern District of Texas 
are woefully underserved.
  On the top of that, the population of Collin County is expected to 
increase by 73 percent by the year 2020. If we don't take care of this 
now, when will we?
  With four judges but just two courtrooms, the Sherman division badly 
needs another courtroom somewhere. That somewhere should be the city of 
Plano. Important to the city of Sherman, the bill also protects the 
Grayson County Courthouse Docket by expanding the Sherman Court 
jurisdiction to four new counties; Fannin, Lamar, Delta, and Hopkins.
  I also want to thank my friend Ralph Hall for his work on this issue. 
I hope he believes we addressed many of his initial concerns.
  Before I close, I'd like to thank my colleagues in the Senate, 
Senators Cornyn and Hutchison, who helped get this bill through the 
other body.
  This measure has passed the House every Congress since 1991, only to 
die in committee in the Senate. Their leadership paved the way to make 
this possible for Collin County.
  In the name of good government, the Federal Government started 
serving the people of Collin County.

                        GENERAL ORDER NO. 03-15

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS


  resolution regarding places of holding court in the sherman division

       Since 1991, both this court and the Judicial Conference of 
     the United States have supported legislation authorizing 
     Plano as a place of holding court in the Sherman Division. 
     Rapid population growth in the Sherman Division over the past 
     decade, particularly in Collin and Denton Counties, 
     underscores the need for an additional court facility. 
     Sherman Division civil and criminal weighted filings over the 
     past five years have grown by 100%. Sherman now has the 
     second heaviest weighted caseload of the six divisions in the 
     Eastern District of Texas.
       In the near future, two resident district judges, a 
     resident magistrate judge and a visiting district judge will 
     be hearing all Sherman Division cases in only two courtrooms. 
     The court has already run out of room in Sherman and needs to 
     acquire additional court facilities in the Division. Having 
     court facilities in both Sherman and Plano will enable the 
     court to better manage the rapidly growing caseload and 
     provide better service to a large population base in southern 
     Collin County.
       It is the court's intention, when a place of holding court 
     in Plano is authorized, to assign the case filings as 
     follows:
       50% civil and criminal cases docketed and tried in Sherman 
     (Judges Brown and Davis)
       50% civil and criminal cases docketed and tried in Plano 
     (Judge Schell)
       In light of the above, the judges of this court hereby 
     REAFFIRM our prior resolution to establish Plano as a place 
     of holding court in the Sherman Division, and RESOLVE, if 
     pending legislation passes that authorizes Plano as a place 
     of holding court, to have half the Sherman Division caseload 
     docketed and tried in Sherman, and the other half of the 
     caseload docketed and tried in Plano. The court intends to 
     maintain at least one resident judge in Sherman and one 
     resident judge in Plano. If Judge Brown ceases holding court 
     in Sherman, a new resident judge shall be designated to hold 
     court in Sherman as soon as possible, and pending the new 
     judge's residing in Sherman, 50% of civil and criminal cases 
     shall be docketed and tried in Sherman, and the clerk's 
     office in Sherman shall remain staffed sufficiently to 
     support a resident judge.

     Signed this 13th day of June, 2003.

     For the Court:

     John Hannah, Jr.
     Chief Judge.

  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, when I arrived at the Capitol today, I was 
handed the floor schedule that indicated that Senate bill 1720 had been 
placed on the Suspension Calendar. We have not had a lot of time to try 
to work out the details, but I am grateful to a lot of people for their 
assurance that we are going to keep the agreement that has been made 
between the two courts.
  First, I want to thank, of course, the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Chairman Sensenbrenner), Debby Lehman, Sam Garg, Blain Merritt, and 
Phil Kiko for their good work and for their support. I thank the 
ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), of the 
Committee on the Judiciary and Perry Applebaum. I thank the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Berman), my friend and ranking member on the 
subcommittee, and Shanna Winters and Alec French. They have all worked 
hard during the course of the day to work out assurance, and with the 
gentleman from Texas's (Mr. Johnson) support of assurance that this 
will be a 50-50 division.
  I have never opposed Plano having a court. It is a huge city. It is a 
great city. It is a growing city. And as we move along with this 50-50 
agreement and Plano grows, as it surely will, they will need more 
judges and more courts there. I certainly hope to help them.
  For several years, efforts have been made to hold court proceedings 
in Plano, Texas where they have had no court proceedings. I have no 
objection to such, and I only want to continue holding court in 
Sherman, Texas. Agreements have been made to hold 50 percent of the 
cases in Plano and 50 percent in Sherman, adding some counties to the 
Sherman district. I only

[[Page 29767]]

want this agreement to be part of the proceedings, and I will be asking 
for a colloquy in a little bit with the gentleman from Wisconsin 
(Chairman Sensenbrenner). I have conferred with Judge McGraw of Grayson 
County. I have received petitions from Judge McGraw and many of the 
major cities in and around Grayson County. I represent them. If I do 
not represent them, they will not be represented in this matter, and I 
want to be recorded here and now that we want an agreement of a 50-50 
division of litigation to be committed to writing, both here and in the 
Senate.
  I have spoken with Senator John Cornyn then of the Committee on the 
Judiciary, and I have spoken with Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, 
subcommittee chairman, and they too want this documentation. There has 
been a difference of opinion as to whether or not it would be codified 
into the statute itself, and while this will not have that 
codification, there will be report language that will be with this 
bill, and I think will be evidence to people within the next 10, 15, 
20, 30, 40 years that we still want a court in Sherman, Texas in 
Grayson County.
  Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn want Grayson County 
protected on the 50-50 agreement and, accordingly, they are placing 
proper report language in the Senate Committee on the Judiciary report 
to be placed with the passage of Senate bill 1720.
  So Mr. Speaker, first, let me place in the Record the statement of 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member on the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  I also want to engage in a colloquy with my colleague, the gentleman 
from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner). I again thank the chairman on 
S. 1720, a bill to provide for the Federal court proceedings in Plano, 
Texas.
  It is my understanding that we have reached an agreement with Members 
on both sides of the aisle and with Senators Cornyn and Hutchison that 
the passage of this legislation shall be accompanied by the following 
report language in the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill 
that would indicate a sense of Congress as follows: ``Both Sherman and 
Plano shall have a resident United States District Judge. Fifty percent 
of the cases filed in or transferred to the Sherman Division of the 
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas shall be 
assigned for trial and tried in Sherman by either the resident United 
States District Judge sitting in Sherman or another United States 
District Judge assigned to hold court in Sherman. The remaining 50 
percent of the cases shall be assigned for trial and tried in Plano by 
either the resident United States District Judge sitting in Plano or 
another United States District Judge assigned to hold court in Plano. 
If the resident judge in Sherman or Plano retires or dies, 50 percent 
of the cases shall continue to be tried in Sherman and 50 percent tried 
in Plano while a new resident judge is being assigned. This provision 
shall not prevent the transfer of a case to another judge or division 
of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas 
or another United States District Court for trial, if such transfer is 
permitted by applicable law.''
  Mr. Speaker, I have long expressed my support and I have no objection 
to a Plano district court. The people in Plano are entitled to a court 
and, likewise, the people of Sherman are entitled to an assurance that 
an addition of a Plano court will not diminish or otherwise imperil the 
court in Sherman. The folks in Plano are happy with the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), and they should be. I want the people in 
Grayson County to be happy with this transaction also. I think this 
report language gives clarity to this amendment and would ensure the 
viability of both courts for the next 50 years.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HALL. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on the Judiciary has no 
control over report language of bills that are under the jurisdiction 
of the Committee on Appropriations, and since the thought has been to 
have this statutory amendment placed in the Commerce, Justice, State 
Appropriation bill, I can say that the Committee on the Judiciary would 
have no objection to this, because this codifies the agreement that has 
been made and the resolution that has been adopted by the judges of the 
Eastern District of Texas, as well as confirmed by the Administrative 
Office of the U.S. Courts representing the Judicial Conference of the 
United States.
  So I have no objection to this statutory amendment if it should find 
its way into an appropriation bill. But the gentleman from Texas and 
everybody else knows full well that what happens in appropriation bills 
at the end of a session of Congress is a very mysterious thing that 
those of us who serve on authorizing committees will never understand 
as long as we are here.
  But rest assured that what the gentleman from Texas has said does 
represent the understanding of members of the Committee on the 
Judiciary, and if the appropriators will listen to us, for once, they 
will be able to make a constructive addition to an appropriation bill, 
whether it is the State, Justice, Commerce one or another one that 
mysteriously arises from the bowels of the Capitol within the next few 
days.
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, we have Senator Cornyn and 
Senator Hutchison who will place this in the report language in the 
Senate judiciary bill.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, 
which would provide greater access to Federal courts for litigants in 
various counties in Texas. One provision of the bill adds the city of 
Plano as a place of holding court; current residents of Plano must 
travel to the city of Sherman. It is my understanding that, with 
respect to the courthouses in Plano and Sherman, the courts will ensure 
that the civil and criminal dockets will be divided equally.
  Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield back the balance 
of my time as well.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1720.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________