[Senate Report 104-366]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 547
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 2d Session                                                     104-366
_______________________________________________________________________


 
            FEDERAL COURTS IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1996--S. 1887

                                _______
                                

               September 9, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


Mr. Hatch, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 1887]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the 
bill (S. 1887) to make improvements in the operation and 
administration of the Federal courts, and for other purposes, 
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with 
amendments and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
  I. Purpose.........................................................23
 II. Legislative history.............................................24
III. Votes of the committee..........................................24
 IV. Section-by-section analysis.....................................25
  V. Regulatory impact statement.....................................45
 VI. Cost estimate...................................................45
VII. Additional views of Mr. Grassley................................52
VIII.Additional views of Mr. Kohl....................................54

 IX. Changes in existing law.........................................58

    The bill, as amended follows:

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

  (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Federal 
Courts Improvement Act of 1996''.
  (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act is 
as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

          TITLE I--CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE AMENDMENTS

Sec. 101. New authority for probation and pretrial services officers.
Sec. 102. Tort Claims Act amendments relating to liability of Federal 
          public defenders.

                 TITLE II--JUDICIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS

Sec. 201. Duties of magistrate judge on emergency assignment.
Sec. 202. Consent to trial in certain criminal actions.
Sec. 203. Venue in civil actions.
Sec. 204. Registration of judgments for enforcement in other districts.
Sec. 205. Vacancy in clerk position; absence of clerk.
Sec. 206. Diversity jurisdiction.
Sec. 207. Bankruptcy Administrator Program.
Sec. 208. Removal of cases against the United States and Federal 
          officers or agencies.
Sec. 209. Appeal route in civil cases decided by magistrate judges with 
          consent.
Sec. 210. Reports by judicial councils relating to misconduct and 
          disability orders.
Sec. 211. Protective orders; sealing of cases; disclosure of 
          information.

TITLE III--JUDICIARY PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, BENEFITS, AND PROTECTIONS

Sec. 301. Senior judge certification.
Sec. 302. Refund of contribution for deceased deferred annuitant under 
          the Judicial Survivors' Annuities System.
Sec. 303. Judicial administrative officials retirement matters.
Sec. 304. Bankruptcy judges reappointment procedure.
Sec. 305. Carrying of firearms.
Sec. 306. Technical correction related to commencement date of temporary 
          judgeships.
Sec. 307. Full-time status of court reporters.
Sec. 308. Court interpreters.
Sec. 309. Technical amendment related to commencement date of temporary 
          bankruptcy judgeships.
Sec. 310. Contribution rate for senior judges under the judicial 
          survivors' annuities system.
Sec. 311. Prohibition against awards of costs, including attorneys fees, 
          and injunctive relief against a judicial officer.

               TITLE IV--JUDICIAL FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

Sec. 401. Increase in civil action filing fee.
Sec. 402. Interpreter performance examination fees.
Sec. 403. Judicial panel on multidistrict litigation.
Sec. 404. Disposition of fees.

         TITLE V--FEDERAL COURTS STUDY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

Sec. 501. Parties' consent to bankruptcy judge's findings and 
          conclusions of law.
Sec. 502. Qualification of Chief Judge of Court of International Trade.
Sec. 503. Judicial cost-of-living adjustments.

                         TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 601. Participation in judicial governance activities by district, 
          senior, and magistrate judges.
Sec. 602. The Director and Deputy Director of the administrative office 
          as officers of the United States.
Sec. 603. Removal of action from State court.
Sec. 604. Federal judicial center employee retirement provisions.
Sec. 605. Abolition of the special court, Regional Rail Reorganization 
          Act of 1973.
Sec. 606. Place of holding court in the District Court of Utah.
Sec. 607. Exception of residency requirement for district judges 
          appointed to the Southern District and Eastern District of New 
          York.
Sec. 608. Extension of civil justice expense and delay reduction reports 
          on pilot and demonstration programs.
Sec. 609. Extension of arbitration.
Sec. 610. State Justice Institute.

         TITLE I--CRIMINAL LAW AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE AMENDMENTS

SEC. 101. NEW AUTHORITY FOR PROBATION AND PRETRIAL SERVICES OFFICERS.

  (a) Probation Officers.--Section 3603 of title 18, United 
States Code, is amended--
          (1) by striking out ``and'' at the end of paragraph 
        (8)(B);
          (2) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); 
        and
          (3) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following 
        new paragraph:
          ``(9) if approved by the district court, be 
        authorized to carry firearms under such rules and 
        regulations as the Director of the Administrative 
        Office of the United States Courts may prescribe; 
        and''.
  (b) Pretrial Services Officers.--Section 3154 of title 18, 
United States Code, is amended--
          (1) by redesignating paragraph (13) as paragraph 
        (14); and
          (2) by inserting after paragraph (12) the following 
        new paragraph:
          ``(13) If approved by the district court, be 
        authorized to carry firearms under such rules and 
        regulations as the Director of the Administrative 
        Office of the United States Courts may prescribe.''.

SEC. 102. TORT CLAIMS ACT AMENDMENTS RELATING TO LIABILITY OF FEDERAL 
                    PUBLIC DEFENDERS.

  Section 2680 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:
  ``(o) Any claim for money damages for injury, loss of 
liberty, loss of property, or personal injury or death arising 
from malpractice or negligence of an officer or employee of a 
Federal Public Defender Organization in furnishing 
representational services under section 3006A of title 18.''.

                TITLE II--JUDICIAL PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS

SEC. 201. DUTIES OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE ON EMERGENCY ASSIGNMENT.

  The first sentence of section 636(f) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by striking out ``(a) or (b)'' and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``(a), (b), or (c)''.

SEC. 202. CONSENT TO TRIAL IN CERTAIN CRIMINAL ACTIONS.

  (a) Amendments to Title 18.--(1) Section 3401(b) of title 18, 
United States Code, is amended--
          (A) by inserting ``, other than a petty offense,'' in 
        the first sentence after ``misdemeanor''; and
          (B) by striking out the third sentence and inserting 
        in lieu thereof the following: ``The magistrate judge 
        may not proceed to try the case unless the defendant, 
        after such explanation, expressly consents to be tried 
        before the magistrate judge and expressly and 
        specifically waives trial, judgment, and sentencing by 
        a district judge. Any such consent and waiver shall be 
        made in writing or orally on the record.''.
  (2) Section 3401(g) of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by striking out the first sentence and inserting in 
lieu thereof the following: ``The magistrate judge may, in a 
petty offense case involving a juvenile, exercise all powers 
granted to the district court under chapter 403 of this 
title.''.
  (b) Amendments to Title 28.--Section 636(a) of title 28, 
United States Code, is amended--
          (1) by striking out ``, and'' at the end of paragraph 
        (3) and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon;
          (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5) 
        and by striking out ``or infraction'' in such paragraph 
        and inserting in lieu thereof ``, other than a petty 
        offense,''; and
          (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following 
        new paragraph:
          ``(4) the power to enter a sentence for a petty 
        offense; and''.

SEC. 203. VENUE IN CIVIL ACTIONS.

  (a) In General.--Section 1392 of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (1) by amending the section heading to read as 
        follows:

``Sec. 1392. Property in different districts in same State'';

          (2) by striking out subsection (a); and
          (3) in subsection (b) by striking out ``(b)''.
  (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
sections for chapter 87 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by amending the item relating to section 1392 to read 
as follows:

``1392. Property in different districts in same State.''.

SEC. 204. REGISTRATION OF JUDGMENTS FOR ENFORCEMENT IN OTHER DISTRICTS.

  (a) In General.--Section 1963 of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (1) by amending the section heading to read as 
        follows:

``Sec. 1963. Registration of judgments for enforcement in other 
                    districts'';

          (2) in the first sentence--
                  (A) by striking out ``district court'' and 
                inserting in lieu thereof ``court of appeals, 
                district court, bankruptcy court,''; and
                  (B) by striking out ``such judgment'' and 
                inserting in lieu thereof ``the judgment''; and
          (3) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
        undesignated paragraph:
  ``The procedure prescribed under this section is in addition 
to other procedures provided by law for the enforcement of 
judgments.''.
  (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
sections for chapter 125 of title 28, United States Code, 
relating to section 1963 is amended to read as follows:

``1963. Registration of judgments for enforcement in other districts.''.

SEC. 205. VACANCY IN CLERK POSITION; ABSENCE OF CLERK.

  (a) In General.--Section 954 of title 28, United States Code, 
is amended to read as follows:

``Sec. 954. Vacancy in clerk position; absence of clerk

  ``When the office of clerk is vacant, the deputy clerks shall 
perform the duties of the clerk in the name of the last person 
who held that office. When the clerk is incapacitated, absent, 
or otherwise unavailable to perform official duties, the deputy 
clerks shall perform the duties of the clerk in the name of the 
clerk. The court may designate a deputy clerk to act 
temporarily as clerk of the court in his or her own name.''.
  (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
sections for chapter 57 of title 28, United States Code, 
relating to section 954 is amended to read as follows:

``954. Vacancy in clerk position; absence of clerk.''.

SEC. 206. DIVERSITY JURISDICTION.

  (a) In General.--Section 1332 of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a) by striking out ``$50,000'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``$75,000''; and
          (2) in subsection (b) by striking out ``$50,000'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``$75,000''.
  (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall 
take effect 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

SEC. 207. BANKRUPTCY ADMINISTRATOR PROGRAM.

  (a) Appointment of Trustees.--Until the amendments made by 
subtitle A of title II of the Bankruptcy Judges, United States 
Trustees, and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986 (28 U.S.C. 
581 note; Public Law 99-554; 100 Stat. 3097) become effective 
in a judicial district and apply to a case, a bankruptcy 
administrator appointed to serve in the district pursuant to 
section 302(d)(3)(I) of such Act, as amended by section 317(a) 
of the Federal Courts Study Committee Implementation Act of 
1990 (Public Law 101-650; 104 Stat. 5115), shall appoint the 
trustees, examiners, and standing trustees notwithstanding the 
references in those sections of title 11, United States Code, 
to appointments by the court.
  (b) Standing Trustees.--A bankruptcy administrator who has 
appointed a standing trustee pursuant to subsection (a) of this 
section shall fix the standing trustee's maximum annual 
compensation and percentage fee, subject to the limitations set 
out in sections 1202 and 1302 of title 11, United States Code, 
as amended by section 110 of the Federal Employee Pay 
Comparability Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-509; 104 Stat. 1427, 
1452). The bankruptcy administrator shall fix the maximum 
annual compensation and percentage fee notwithstanding the 
references in those sections of title 11, United States Code, 
to the court's fixing them.
  (c) Service as Trustee.--A bankruptcy administrator may serve 
as and perform the duties of a trustee in a case under chapter 
7 of title 11, United States Code, if none of the members of 
the panel of private trustees is disinterested and willing to 
serve as trustee in the case. A bankruptcy administrator may 
serve as and perform the duties of a trustee or standing 
trustee in cases under chapter 12 or chapter 13 of title 11, 
United States Code, if necessary.
  (d) Appointment of Committees.--Until the amendments made by 
subtitle A of title II of the Bankruptcy Judges, United States 
Trustees, and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986 become 
effective in a judicial district and apply to a case, the 
bankruptcy administrator appointed to serve in the district 
shall appoint the committees of creditors and equity security 
holders provided in section 1102 of title 11, United States 
Code. The bankruptcy administrator shall appoint the committees 
notwithstanding the references in those sections of title 11, 
United States Code, to appointments by the court.

SEC. 208. REMOVAL OF CASES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES AND FEDERAL 
                    OFFICERS OR AGENCIES.

  (a) In General.--Section 1442 of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (1) in the section heading by inserting ``or 
        agencies'' after ``officers''; and
          (2) in subsection (a)--
                  (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by 
                striking out ``persons''; and
                  (B) in paragraph (1) by striking out ``Any 
                officer of the United States or any agency 
                thereof, or person acting under him, for any 
                act under color of such office'' and inserting 
                in lieu thereof ``The United States or any 
                agency thereof or any officer (or any person 
                acting under that officer) of the United States 
                or of any agency thereof, sued in an official 
                or individual capacity for any act under color 
                of such office''.
  (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
sections for chapter 89 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by amending the item relating to section 1442 to read 
as follows:

``1442. Federal officers and agencies sued or prosecuted.''.

SEC. 209. APPEAL ROUTE IN CIVIL CASES DECIDED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGES WITH 
                    CONSENT.

  Section 636 of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
          (1) in subsection (c)--
                  (A) in paragraph (3) by striking out ``In 
                this circumstance, the'' and inserting in lieu 
                thereof ``The'';
                  (B) by striking out paragraphs (4) and (5); 
                and
                  (C) by redesignating paragraphs (6) and (7) 
                as paragraphs (4) and (5); and
          (2) in subsection (d) by striking out ``, and for the 
        taking and hearing of appeals to the district 
        courts,''.

SEC. 210. REPORTS BY JUDICIAL COUNCILS RELATING TO MISCONDUCT AND 
                    DISABILITY ORDERS.

  Section 332 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:
  ``(g) No later than January 31 of each year, each judicial 
council shall submit a report to the Administrative Office of 
the United States Courts on the number and nature of orders 
entered under this section during the preceding calendar year 
that relate to judicial misconduct or disability.''.

SEC. 211. PROTECTIVE ORDERS; SEALING OF CASES; DISCLOSURE OF 
                    INFORMATION.

  (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Sunshine 
in Litigation Act of 1996''.
  (b) Protective Orders and Sealing of Cases and Settlements 
Relating to Public Health or Safety.--Chapter 111 of title 28, 
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the 
following new section:

``Sec. 1659. Protective orders and sealing of cases and settlements 
                    relating to public health or safety

  ``(a)(1) A court shall enter an order under rule 26(c) of the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure restricting the disclosure of 
information obtained through discovery or an order restricting 
access to court records in a civil case only after making 
particularized findings of fact that--
          ``(A) such order would not restrict the disclosure of 
        information which is relevant to the protection of 
        public health or safety; or
          ``(B)(i) the public interest in disclosure of 
        potential health or safety hazards is clearly 
        outweighed by a specific and substantial interest in 
        maintaining the confidentiality of the information or 
        records in question; and
          ``(ii) the requested protective order is no broader 
        than necessary to protect the privacy interest 
        asserted.
  ``(2) No order entered in accordance with the provisions of 
paragraph (1) shall continue in effect after the entry of final 
judgment, unless at or after such entry the court makes a 
separate particularized finding of fact that the requirements 
of paragraph (1) (A) or (B) have been met.
  ``(b) The party who is the proponent for the entry of an 
order, as provided under this section, shall have the burden of 
proof in obtaining such an order.
  ``(c)(1) No agreement between or among parties in a civil 
action filed in a court of the United States may contain a 
provision that prohibits or otherwise restricts a party from 
disclosing any information relevant to such civil action to any 
Federal or State agency with authority to enforce laws 
regulating an activity relating to such information.
  ``(2) Any disclosure of information to a Federal or State 
agency as described under paragraph (1) shall be confidential 
to the extent provided by law.''.
  (c) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
sections for chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding after the item relating to section 1658 the 
following:

``1659. Protective orders and sealing of cases and settlements relating 
          to public health or safety.''.

  (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
shall take effect 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
this Act and shall apply only to orders entered in civil 
actions or agreements entered into on or after such date.

     TITLE III--JUDICIARY PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION, BENEFITS, AND 
                              PROTECTIONS

SEC. 301. SENIOR JUDGE CERTIFICATION.

  (a) Retroactive Credit for Resumption of Significant 
Workload.--Section 371(f)(3) of title 28, United States Code, 
is amended by striking out ``is thereafter ineligible to 
receive such a certification.'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
``may thereafter receive a certification for that year by 
satisfying the requirements of subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or 
(D) of paragraph (1) of this subsection in a subsequent year 
and attributing a sufficient part of the work performed in such 
subsequent year to the earlier year so that the work so 
attributed, when added to the work performed during such 
earlier year, satisfies the requirements for certification for 
that year. However, a justice or judge may not receive credit 
for the same work for purposes of certification for more than 1 
year.''.
  (b) Aggregation of Certain Work for Partial Years.--Section 
371(f)(1) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end of subparagraph (D) the following: ``In any year in 
which a justice or judge performs work described under this 
subparagraph for less than the full year, one-half of such work 
may be aggregated with work described under subparagraph (A), 
(B), or (C) of this paragraph for the purpose of the justice or 
judge satisfying the requirements of such subparagraph.''.

SEC. 302. REFUND OF CONTRIBUTION FOR DECEASED DEFERRED ANNUITANT UNDER 
                    THE JUDICIAL SURVIVORS' ANNUITIES SYSTEM.

  Section 376(o)(1) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
by striking out ``or while receiving `retirement salary','' and 
inserting in lieu thereof ``while receiving retirement salary, 
or after filing an election and otherwise complying with the 
conditions under subsection (b)(2) of this section,''.

SEC. 303. JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIALS RETIREMENT MATTERS.

  (a) Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts.--(1) Section 611(b) of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (A) in the first undesignated paragraph by striking 
        out ``who has served at least fifteen years and'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``who has at least 15 years 
        of service and has''; and
          (B) in the second undesignated paragraph by striking 
        out ``who has served at least ten years,'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``who has at least 10 years 
        of service,''.
  (2) Section 611(c) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended--
          (A) by striking out ``served at least fifteen 
        years,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``at least 15 
        years of service,''; and
          (B) by striking out ``served less than fifteen 
        years,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``less than 15 
        years of service,''.
  (3) Section 611(d) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting ``a congressional employee in the capacity 
of primary administrative assistant to a Member of Congress or 
in the capacity of staff director or chief counsel for the 
majority or the minority of a committee or subcommittee of the 
Senate or House of Representatives,'' after ``Congress,''.
  (b) Employees of the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts.--(1) Section 627(c) of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended--
          (A) in the first undesignated paragraph by striking 
        out ``who has served at least fifteen years and'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``who has at least 15 years 
        of service and has''; and
          (B) in the second undesignated paragraph by striking 
        out ``who has served at least ten years,'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``who has at least 10 years 
        of service,''.
  (2) Section 627(d) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended--
          (A) by striking out ``served at least fifteen 
        years,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``at least 15 
        years of service,''; and
          (B) by striking out ``served less than fifteen 
        years,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``less than 15 
        years of service,''.
  (3) Section 627(e) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting ``a congressional employee in the capacity 
of primary administrative assistant to a Member of Congress or 
in the capacity of staff director or chief counsel for the 
majority or the minority of a committee or subcommittee of the 
Senate or House of Representatives,'' after ``Congress,''.

SEC. 304. BANKRUPTCY JUDGES REAPPOINTMENT PROCEDURE.

  Section 120 of the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal 
Judgeship Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-353; 98 Stat. 344), is 
amended--
          (1) in subsection (a) by adding at the end thereof 
        the following new paragraph:
  ``(3) When filling vacancies, the court of appeals may 
consider reappointing incumbent bankruptcy judges under 
procedures prescribed by regulations issued by the Judicial 
Conference of the United States.''; and
          (2) in subsection (b) by adding at the end thereof 
        the following: ``All incumbent nominees seeking 
        reappointment thereafter may be considered for such a 
        reappointment, pursuant to a majority vote of the 
        judges of the appointing court of appeals, under 
        procedures authorized under subsection (a)(3).''.

SEC. 305. CARRYING OF FIREARMS.

  (a) In General.--Chapter 21 of title 28, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
section:

``Sec. 464. Carrying of firearms by judicial officers

  ``(a) A judicial officer of the United States is authorized 
to carry firearms, whether concealed or not, under regulations 
promulgated by the Judicial Conference of the United States.
  ``(b)(1) The regulations promulgated by the Judicial 
Conference under subsection (a) shall--
          ``(A) require a demonstration of a judicial officer's 
        proficiency in the use and safety of firearms as a 
        prerequisite to the carrying of firearms under the 
        authority of this section; and
          ``(B) make appropriate provisions for the carrying of 
        firearms by judicial officers who are under the 
        protection of United States Marshals while away from 
        United States courthouses.
  ``(2) On the request of the Judicial Conference, the 
Department of Justice (including each agency of the Department) 
shall cooperate with the Judicial Conference in providing 
firearms training and other services to assist judicial 
officers in securing such proficiency.
  ``(c) For purposes of this section, the term `judicial 
officer of the United States' means--
          ``(1) a justice or judge of the United States as 
        defined in section 451 of this title in regular active 
        or retired from regular active service;
          ``(2) a justice or judge of the United States who has 
        retired from the judicial office under section 371(a) 
        of this title for--
                  ``(A) a 1-year period following such 
                justice's or judge's retirement; or
                  ``(B) a longer period of time if approved by 
                the Judicial Conference of the United States 
                when exceptional circumstances warrant;
          ``(3) a United States bankruptcy judge;
          ``(4) a full-time or part-time United States 
        magistrate judge;
          ``(5) a judge of the United States Court of Federal 
        Claims;
          ``(6) a judge of the United States District Court of 
        Guam;
          ``(7) a judge of the United States District Court for 
        the Northern Mariana Islands;
          ``(8) a judge of the United States District Court of 
        the Virgin Islands; or
          ``(9) an individual who is retired from one of the 
        judicial positions described under paragraphs (3) 
        through (8) to the extent provided for in regulations 
        of the Judicial Conference of the United States.
  ``(d) Notwithstanding section 46303(c)(1) of title 49, 
nothing in this section authorizes a judicial officer of the 
United States to carry a dangerous weapon on an aircraft or 
other common carrier.''
  (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
sections for chapter 21 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

``464. Carrying of firearms by judicial officers.''.

  (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
shall take effect 1 year after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.

SEC. 306. TECHNICAL CORRECTION RELATED TO COMMENCEMENT DATE OF 
                    TEMPORARY JUDGESHIPS.

  Section 203(c) of the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 
(Public Law 101-650; 104 Stat. 5101; 28 U.S.C. 133 note) is 
amended by adding at the end thereof the following: ``For 
districts named in this subsection for which multiple 
judgeships are created by this Act, the last of those 
judgeships filled shall be the judgeship created under this 
subsection.''.

SEC. 307. FULL-TIME STATUS OF COURT REPORTERS.

  Section 753(e) of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting after the first sentence the following: ``For the 
purposes of subchapter III of chapter 83 of title 5 and chapter 
84 of such title, a reporter shall be considered a full-time 
employee during any pay period for which a reporter receives a 
salary at the annual salary rate fixed for a full-time reporter 
under the preceding sentence.''.

SEC. 308. COURT INTERPRETERS.

  Section 1827 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:
  ``(l) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section or 
section 1828, the presiding judicial officer may appoint a 
certified or otherwise qualified sign language interpreter to 
provide services to a party, witness, or other participant in a 
judicial proceeding, whether or not the proceeding is 
instituted by the United States, if the presiding judicial 
officer determines, on such officer's own motion or on the 
motion of a party or other participant in the proceeding, that 
such individual suffers from a hearing impairment. The 
presiding judicial officer shall, subject to the availability 
of appropriated funds, approve the compensation and expenses 
payable to sign language interpreters appointed under this 
section in accordance with the schedule of fees prescribed by 
the Director under subsection (b)(3) of this section.''.

SEC. 309. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT RELATED TO COMMENCEMENT DATE OF TEMPORARY 
                    BANKRUPTCY JUDGESHIPS.

  Section 3(b) of the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 1992 (Public 
Law 102-361; 106 Stat. 965; 28 U.S.C. 152 note) is amended in 
the first sentence by striking out ``date of the enactment of 
this Act'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``appointment date of 
the judge named to fill the temporary judgeship position''.

SEC. 310. CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR SENIOR JUDGES UNDER THE JUDICIAL 
                    SURVIVORS' ANNUITIES SYSTEM.

  Section 376(b)(1) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
to read as follows:
  ``(b)(1) Every judicial official who files a written 
notification of his or her intention to come within the purview 
of this section, in accordance with paragraph (1) of subsection 
(a) of this section, shall be deemed thereby to consent and 
agree to having deducted and withheld from his or her salary a 
sum equal to 2.2 percent of that salary, and a sum equal to 3.5 
percent of his or her retirement salary. The deduction from any 
retirement salary--
          ``(A) of a justice or judge of the United States 
        retired from regular active service under section 
        371(b) or section 372(a) of this title,
          ``(B) of a judge of the United States Court of 
        Federal Claims retired under section 178 of this title, 
        or
          ``(C) of a judicial official on recall under section 
        155(b), 373(c)(4), 375, or 636(h) of this title,
shall be an amount equal to 2.2 percent of retirement 
salary.''.

SEC. 311. PROHIBITION AGAINST AWARDS OF COSTS, INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S 
                    FEES, AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST A JUDICIAL 
                    OFFICER.

  (a) Nonliability for Costs.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, no judicial officer shall be held liable for 
any costs, including attorney's fees, in any action brought 
against such officer for an act or omission taken in such 
officer's judicial capacity, unless such action was clearly in 
excess of such officer's jurisdiction.
  (b) Proceedings in Vindication of Civil Rights.--Section 
722(b) of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1988(b)) is amended 
by inserting before the period at the end thereof ``, except 
that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an 
act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity such 
officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including 
attorney's fees, unless such action was clearly in excess of 
such officer's jurisdiction''.
  (c) Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights.--Section 1979 of 
the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983) is amended by inserting 
before the period at the end of the first sentence: ``, except 
that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an 
act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, 
injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory 
decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable''.

              TITLE IV--JUDICIAL FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

SEC. 401. INCREASE IN CIVIL ACTION FILING FEE.

  (a) Filing Fee Increase.--Section 1914(a) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by striking out ``$120'' and inserting 
in lieu thereof ``$150''.
  (b) Disposition of Increase.--Section 1931 of title 28, 
United States Code, is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a) by striking out ``$60'' and 
        inserting in lieu thereof ``$90''; and
          (2) in subsection (b)--
                  (A) by striking out ``$120'' and inserting in 
                lieu thereof ``$150''; and
                  (B) by striking out ``$60'' and inserting in 
                lieu thereof ``$90''.
  (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 60 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 402. INTERPRETER PERFORMANCE EXAMINATION FEES.

  (a) In General.--Section 1827(g) of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph 
(6) and inserting after paragraph (4) the following new 
paragraph:
  ``(5) If the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts finds it necessary to develop and 
administer criterion-referenced performance examinations for 
purposes of certification, or other examinations for the 
selection of otherwise qualified interpreters, the Director may 
prescribe for each examination a uniform fee for applicants to 
take such examination. In determining the rate of the fee for 
each examination, the Director shall consider the fees charged 
by other organizations for examinations that are similar in 
scope or nature. Notwithstanding section 3302(b) of title 31, 
the Director is authorized to provide in any contract or 
agreement for the development or administration of examinations 
and the collection of fees that the contractor may retain all 
or a portion of the fees in payment for the services. 
Notwithstanding paragraph (6) of this subsection, all fees 
collected after the effective date of this paragraph and not 
retained by a contractor shall be deposited in the fund 
established under section 1931 of this title and shall remain 
available until expended.''.
  (b) Payment for Contractual Services.--Notwithstanding 
sections 3302(b), 1341, and 1517 of title 31, United States 
Code, the Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts may include in any contract for the development 
or administration of examinations for interpreters (including 
such a contract entered into before the date of the enactment 
of this Act) a provision which permits the contractor to 
collect and retain fees in payment for contractual services in 
accordance with section 1827(g)(5) of title 28, United States 
Code.

SEC. 403. JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION.

  (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 123 of title 28, United States 
Code, is amended by adding after section 1931 the following new 
section:

``Sec. 1932. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

  ``The Judicial Conference of the United States shall 
prescribe from time to time the fees and costs to be charged 
and collected by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict 
Litigation.''.
  (2) The table of sections for chapter 123 of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by adding after the item relating to 
section 1931 the following:

``1932. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.''.
  (b) Related Fees for Access to Information.--Section 303(a) 
of the Judiciary Appropriations Act, 1992 (Public Law 102-140; 
105 Stat. 810; 28 U.S.C. 1913 note) is amended in the first 
sentence by striking out ``1926, and 1930'' and inserting in 
lieu thereof ``1926, 1930, and 1932''.

SEC. 404. DISPOSITION OF FEES.

  (a) Disposition of Attorney Admission Fees.--For each fee 
collected for admission of an attorney to practice, as 
prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States 
pursuant to section 1914 of title 28, United States Code, $30 
of that portion of the fee exceeding $20 shall be deposited 
into the special fund of the Treasury established under section 
1931 of title 28, United States Code. Any portion exceeding $5 
of the fee for a duplicate certificate of admission or 
certificate of good standing, as prescribed by the Judicial 
Conference of the United States pursuant to section 1914 of 
title 28, United States Code, shall be deposited into the 
special fund of the Treasury established under section 1931 of 
title 28, United States Code.
  (b) Disposition of Bankruptcy Complaint Filing Fees.--For 
each fee collected for filing an adversary complaint in a 
bankruptcy proceeding, as established in Item 6 of the 
Bankruptcy Court Miscellaneous Fee Schedule prescribed by the 
Judicial Conference of the United States pursuant to section 
1930(b) of title 28, United States Code, the portion of the fee 
exceeding $120 shall be deposited into the special fund of the 
Treasury established under section 1931 of title 28, United 
States Code.
  (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 60 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act.

        TITLE V--FEDERAL COURTS STUDY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

SEC. 501. PARTIES' CONSENT TO BANKRUPTCY JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND 
                    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW.

  Section 157(c)(1) of title 28, United States Code, is amended 
to read as follows:
  ``(c)(1) A bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that is not 
a core proceeding but that is otherwise related to a case under 
title 11. In such proceeding, the bankruptcy judge shall submit 
proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the 
district court, and any final order or judgment shall be 
entered by the district judge after considering the bankruptcy 
judge's proposed findings and conclusions and after reviewing 
de novo those matters to which any party has timely and 
specifically objected. A party shall be deemed to consent to 
the findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by a 
bankruptcy judge unless the party files a timely objection. If 
a timely objection is not filed, the proposed findings of fact 
and conclusions of law submitted by the bankruptcy judge shall 
become final and the bankruptcy judge shall enter an 
appropriate order thereon.''.

SEC. 502. QUALIFICATION OF CHIEF JUDGE OF COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE.

  (a) In General.--Chapter 11 of title 28, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
section:

``Sec. 258. Chief judges; precedence of judges

  ``(a)(1) The chief judge of the Court of International Trade 
shall be the judge of the court in regular active service who 
is senior in commission of those judges who--
          ``(A) are 64 years of age or under;
          ``(B) have served for 1 year or more as a judge of 
        the court; and
          ``(C) have not served previously as chief judge.
  ``(2)(A) In any case in which no judge of the court meets the 
qualifications under paragraph (1), the youngest judge in 
regular active service who is 65 years of age or over and who 
has served as a judge of the court for 1 year or more shall act 
as the chief judge.
  ``(B) In any case under subparagraph (A) in which there is no 
judge of the court in regular active service who has served as 
a judge of the court for 1 year or more, the judge of the court 
in regular active service who is senior in commission and who 
has not served previously as chief judge shall act as the chief 
judge.
  ``(3)(A) Except as provided under subparagraph (C), the chief 
judge serving under paragraph (1) shall serve for a term of 7 
years and shall serve after expiration of such term until 
another judge is eligible under paragraph (1) to serve as chief 
judge.
  ``(B) Except as provided under subparagraph (C), a judge of 
the court acting as chief judge under subparagraph (A) or (B) 
of paragraph (2) shall serve until a judge meets the 
qualifications under paragraph (1).
  ``(C) No judge of the court may serve or act as chief judge 
of the court after attaining the age of 70 years unless no 
other judge is qualified to serve as chief judge under 
paragraph (1) or is qualified to act as chief judge under 
paragraph (2).
  ``(b) The chief judge shall have precedence and preside at 
any session of the court which such judge attends. Other judges 
of the court shall have precedence and preside according to the 
seniority of their commissions. Judges whose commissions bear 
the same date shall have precedence according to seniority in 
age.
  ``(c) If the chief judge desires to be relieved of the duties 
as chief judge while retaining active status as a judge of the 
court, the chief judge may so certify to the Chief Justice of 
the United States, and thereafter the chief judge of the court 
shall be such other judge of the court who is qualified to 
serve or act as chief judge under subsection (a).
  ``(d) If a chief judge is temporarily unable to perform the 
duties as such, such duties shall be performed by the judge of 
the court in active service, able and qualified to act, who is 
next in precedence.''.
  (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Chapter 11 of title 
28, United States Code, is amended--
          (1) in section 251 by striking out subsection (b) and 
        redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (b);
          (2) in section 253--
                  (A) by amending the section heading to read 
                as follows:

``Sec. 253. Duties of chief judge.'';

                and
                  (B) by striking out subsections (d) and (e); 
                and
          (3) in the table of sections for chapter 11 of title 
        28, United States Code--
                  (A) by amending the item relating to section 
                253 to read as follows:

``253. Duties of chief judge.'';
                and
                  (B) by adding at the end thereof the 
                following:

``258. Chief judges; precedence of judges.''.

  (c) Application.--(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of 
section 258(a) of title 28, United States Code (as added by 
subsection (a) of this section), the chief judge of the United 
States Court of International Trade who is in office on the day 
before the date of enactment of this Act shall continue to be 
such chief judge on or after such date until any one of the 
following events occurs:
          (A) The chief judge is relieved of his duties under 
        section 258(c) of title 28, United States Code.
          (B) The regular active status of the chief judge is 
        terminated.
          (C) The chief judge attains the age of 70 years.
          (D) The chief judge has served for a term of 7 years 
        as chief judge.
  (2) When the chief judge vacates the position of chief judge 
under paragraph (1), the position of chief judge of the Court 
of International Trade shall be filled in accordance with 
section 258(a) of title 28, United States Code.

SEC. 503. JUDICIAL COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENTS.

  Section 140 of the resolution entitled ``A Joint Resolution 
making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 
1982, and for other purposes.'', approved December 15, 1981 
(Public Law 97-92; 95 Stat. 1200; 28 U.S.C. 461 note) is 
repealed.

                        TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 601. PARTICIPATION IN JUDICIAL GOVERNANCE ACTIVITIES BY DISTRICT, 
                    SENIOR, AND MAGISTRATE JUDGES.

  (a) Judicial Conference of the United States.--Section 331 of 
title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking out the 
second undesignated paragraph and inserting in lieu thereof the 
following:
  ``The district judge to be summoned from each judicial 
circuit shall be chosen by the circuit and district judges of 
the circuit and shall serve as a member of the Judicial 
Conference of the United States for a term of not less than 3 
successive years nor more than 5 successive years, as 
established by majority vote of all circuit and district judges 
of the circuit. A district judge serving as a member of the 
Judicial Conference may be either a judge in regular active 
service or a judge retired from regular active service under 
section 371(b) of this title.''.
  (b) Board of the Federal Judicial Center.--Section 621 of 
title 28, United States Code, is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a) by striking out paragraph (2) 
        and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
          ``(2) two circuit judges, three district judges, one 
        bankruptcy judge, and one magistrate judge, elected by 
        vote of the members of the Judicial Conference of the 
        United States, except that any circuit or district 
        judge so elected may be either a judge in regular 
        active service or a judge retired from regular active 
        service under section 371(b) of this title but shall 
        not be a member of the Judicial Conference of the 
        United States; and''; and
          (2) in subsection (b) by striking out ``retirement,'' 
        and inserting in lieu thereof ``retirement pursuant to 
        section 371(a) or section 372(a) of this title,''.

SEC. 602. THE DIRECTOR AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 
                    AS OFFICERS OF THE UNITED STATES.

  Section 601 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by 
adding at the end thereof the following: ``The Director and 
Deputy Director shall be deemed to be officers for purposes of 
title 5, United States Code.''.

SEC. 603. REMOVAL OF ACTION FROM STATE COURT.

  Section 1446(c)(1) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by striking out ``petitioner'' and inserting in lieu 
thereof ``defendant or defendants''.

SEC. 604. FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT PROVISIONS.

  Section 627(b) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
          (1) in the first sentence by inserting ``Deputy 
        Director,'' before ``the professional staff''; and
          (2) in the first sentence by inserting ``chapter 84 
        (relating to the Federal Employees' Retirement 
        System),'' after ``(relating to civil service 
        retirement),''.

SEC. 605. ABOLITION OF THE SPECIAL COURT, REGIONAL RAIL REORGANIZATION 
                    ACT OF 1973.

  (a) Abolition of the Special Court.--Section 209 of the 
Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 719) is 
amended in subsection (b)--
          (1) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``Within 30 days 
        after''; and
          (2) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
        paragraph:
  ``(2) The special court referred to in paragraph (1) of this 
subsection is abolished effective 90 days after the date of 
enactment of the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1996. On 
such effective date, all jurisdiction and other functions of 
the special court shall be assumed by the United States 
District Court for the District of Columbia. With respect to 
any proceedings that arise or continue after the date on which 
the special court is abolished, the references in the following 
provisions to the special court established under this 
subsection shall be deemed to refer to the United States 
District Court for the District of Columbia:
          ``(A) Subsections (c), (e)(1), (e)(2), (f) and (g) of 
        this section.
          ``(B) Sections 202 (d)(3), (g), 207 (a)(1), (b)(1), 
        (b)(2), 208(d)(2), 301 (e)(2), (g), (k)(3), (k)(15), 
        303 (a)(1), (a)(2), (b)(1), (b)(6)(A), (c)(1), (c)(2), 
        (c)(3), (c)(4), (c)(5), 304 (a)(1)(B), (i)(3), 305 (c), 
        (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), (d)(8), (e), 
        (f)(1), (f)(2)(B), (f)(2)(D), (f)(2)(E), (f)(3), 306 
        (a), (b), (c)(4), and 601 (b)(3), (c) of this Act (45 
        U.S.C. 712 (d)(3), (g), 717 (a)(1), (b)(1), (b)(2), 
        718(d)(2), 741 (e)(2), (g), (k)(3), (k)(15), 743 
        (a)(1), (a)(2), (b)(1), (b)(6)(A), (c)(1), (c)(2), 
        (c)(3), (c)(4), (c)(5), 744 (a)(1)(B), (i)(3), 745 (c), 
        (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), (d)(8), (e), 
        (f)(1), (f)(2)(B), (f)(2)(D), (f)(2)(E), (f)(3), 746 
        (a), (b), (c)(4), 791 (b)(3), (c)).
          ``(C) Sections 1152(a) and 1167(b) of the Northeast 
        Rail Service Act of 1981 (45 U.S.C. 1105(a), 1115(a)).
          ``(D) Sections 4023 (2)(A)(iii), (2)(B), (2)(C), 
        (3)(C), (3)(E), (4)(A) and 4025(b) of the Conrail 
        Privatization Act (45 U.S.C. 1323 (2)(A)(iii), (2)(B), 
        (2)(C), (3)(C), (3)(E), (4)(A), 1324(b)).
          ``(E) Section 24907(b) of title 49, United States 
        Code.
          ``(F) Any other Federal law (other than this 
        subsection and section 605 of the Federal Courts 
        Improvement Act of 1996), Executive order, rule, 
        regulation, delegation of authority, or document of or 
        relating to the special court as previously established 
        under paragraph (1) of this subsection.''.
  (b) Appellate Review.--(1) Section 209(e) of the Regional 
Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 719) is amended by 
striking out the paragraph following paragraph (2) and 
inserting in lieu thereof the following:
  ``(3) An order or judgment of the United States District 
Court for the District of Columbia in any action referred to in 
this section shall be reviewable in accordance with sections 
1291, 1292, and 1294 of title 28, United States Code.''.
  (2) Section 303 of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 
1973 (45 U.S.C. 743) is amended by striking out subsection (d) 
and inserting in lieu thereof the following:
  ``(d) Appeal.--An order or judgment entered by the United 
States District Court for the District of Columbia pursuant to 
subsection (c) of this section or section 306 shall be 
reviewable in accordance with sections 1291, 1292, and 1294 of 
title 28, United States Code.''.
  (3) Section 1152 of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981 
(45 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by striking out subsection (b) and 
inserting in lieu thereof the following:
  ``(b) Appeal.--An order or judgment of the United States 
District Court for the District of Columbia in any action 
referred to in this section shall be reviewable in accordance 
with sections 1291, 1292, and 1294 of title 28, United States 
Code.''.
  (c) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 209 of 
the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 719) is 
further amended--
          (A) in subsection (g) by inserting ``or Court of 
        Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit'' after 
        ``Supreme Court''; and
          (B) by striking out subsection (h).
  (2) Section 305(d)(4) of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act 
of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 745(d)) is amended by striking out ``a judge 
of the United States district court with respect to such 
proceedings and such powers shall include those of''.
  (3) Section 1135(a)(8) of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 
1981 (45 U.S.C. 1104(8)) is amended to read as follows:
  ``(8) `Special court' means the judicial panel established 
under section 209(b)(1) of the Regional Rail Reorganization Act 
of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 719(b)(1)) or, with respect to any 
proceedings that arise or continue after the panel is abolished 
pursuant to section 209(b)(2) of such Act, the United States 
District Court for the District of Columbia.''.
  (4) Section 1152 of the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981 
(45 U.S.C. 1105) is further amended by striking out subsection 
(d).
  (d) Pending Cases.--Effective 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, any case pending in the special court 
established under section 209(b) of the Regional Rail 
Reorganization Act of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 719(b)) shall be assigned 
to the United States District Court for the District of 
Columbia as though the case had originally been filed in that 
court. The amendments made by subsection (b) of this section 
shall not apply to any final order or judgment entered by the 
special court for which--
          (1) a petition for writ of certiorari has been filed 
        before the date on which the special court is 
        abolished; or
          (2) the time for filing a petition for writ of 
        certiorari has not expired before that date.
  (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (b) 
and (c) of this section shall take effect 90 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act and, except as provided in 
subsection (d), shall apply with respect to proceedings that 
arise or continue after such effective date.

SEC. 606. PLACE OF HOLDING COURT IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF UTAH.

  (a) Northern Division.--Section 125(1) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by inserting ``Salt Lake City and'' 
before ``Ogden''.
  (b) Central Division.--Section 125(2) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended by inserting ``, Provo, and St. 
George'' after ``Salt Lake City''.

SEC. 607. EXCEPTION OF RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT FOR DISTRICT JUDGES 
                    APPOINTED TO THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT AND EASTERN 
                    DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.

  Section 134(b) of title 28, United States Code, is amended--
          (1) by inserting ``the Southern District of New York, 
        and the Eastern District of New York,'' after ``the 
        District of Columbia,''; and
          (2) by inserting at the end the following: ``Each 
        district judge of the Southern District of New York and 
        the Eastern District of New York may reside within 20 
        miles of the district to which he or she is 
        appointed.''.

SEC. 608. EXTENSION OF CIVIL JUSTICE EXPENSE AND DELAY REDUCTION 
                    REPORTS ON DEMONSTRATION AND PILOT PROGRAMS.

  (a) Demonstration Program.--Section 104(d) of the Civil 
Justice Reform Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 471 note) is amended by 
striking out ``December 31, 1996,'' and inserting in lieu 
thereof ``June 30, 1997,''.
  (b) Pilot Program.--Section 105(c)(1) of the Civil Justice 
Reform Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 471 note) is amended by striking 
out ``December 31, 1996,'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``June 
30, 1997,''.

SEC. 609. EXTENSION OF ARBITRATION.

  Section 905 of the Judicial Improvements and Access to 
Justice Act (28 U.S.C. 651 note) is amended in the first 
sentence by striking out ``1997'' and inserting in lieu thereof 
``1998''.

SEC. 610. STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE.

  (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 215 of the 
State Justice Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10713) is 
amended to read as follows:


                   ``authorization of appropriations


  ``Sec. 215. There are authorized to be appropriated to carry 
out the purposes of this title $12,500,000 for each of fiscal 
years 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000, to remain available until 
expended.''.
  (b) Executive Committee.--Section 204(j) of the State Justice 
Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10703(j)) is amended by 
inserting ``(on such occasions as it has been delegated the 
authority to act for the Board)'' after ``executive 
committee''.
  (c) Howell Heflin Award.--Section 204(k) of the State Justice 
Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10703(k)) is amended--
          (1) in paragraph (5) by striking out ``and'' after 
        the semicolon;
          (2) in paragraph (6) by striking out the period and 
        inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and ``and''; and
          (3) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
        paragraph:
          ``(7) present an annual Howell Heflin Award in 
        recognition of an innovative Institute-supported 
        project that has a high likelihood of significantly 
        improving the quality of justice in State courts across 
        the Nation.''.
  (d) Priority in Making Awards.--Section 206(b) of the State 
Justice Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (5) as 
        paragraphs (2) through (6), respectively;
          (2) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as 
        redesignated under paragraph (1) of this subsection) 
        the following new paragraph:
          ``(1) The Institute shall give highest priority to 
        awarding grants to and entering into cooperative 
        agreements or contracts with State and local courts.''; 
        and
          (3) in paragraph (2) (as redesignated by paragraph 
        (1) of this subsection)--
                  (A) by striking out subparagraph (A); and
                  (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and 
                (C) as subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively.
  (e) Geographic Distribution of Grants.--Section 206(b) of the 
State Justice Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10705(b)) (as 
amended by subsection (d) of this section) is further amended 
by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph:
          ``(7) In making grants under this title, the 
        Institute shall undertake outreach efforts to assure 
        the widest feasible geographical distribution of grant 
        funds and benefits resulting from grants, consistent 
        with its mission to award grants having the greatest 
        likelihood of improving the quality of justice 
        nationwide.''.
  (f) Nonsupplantation.--Section 207(d) of the State Justice 
Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10706(d)) is amended--
          (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by 
        inserting ``or noncourt related activities of private 
        organizations'' after ``basic court services'';
          (2) in paragraph (1)--
                  (A) by striking out ``State or local'' and 
                inserting in lieu thereof ``State, local, or 
                private organizational''; and
                  (B) by striking out ``or'' after the 
                semicolon;
          (3) in paragraph (2) by striking out the period and 
        inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and ``or''; and
          (4) by adding at the end thereof the following new 
        paragraph:
          ``(3) to support the activities of any national, 
        State, or local bar association, except for--
                  ``(A) the training of State court judges or 
                court personnel, if such training is not 
                provided by any person or entity other than a 
                bar association; or
                  ``(B) projects conducted in State courts or 
                directly in conjunction with State courts to 
                improve the efficiency of such courts.''.
  (g) Reports to Congress.--Section 213 of the State Justice 
Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10712) is amended to read as 
follows:


                         ``reports to congress


  ``Sec. 213. Effective January 1, 1997, the Institute shall 
provide semiannual reports to the Committees on the Judiciary 
of the Senate and the House of Representatives identifying all 
grants made by the Institute during the preceding six months. 
The report shall include the name and address of the grantee, 
the purpose of the project, the amount of funding provided, and 
the duration of the project.''.

                               I. Purpose

    The committee believes that S. 1887 will substantially 
improve the efficiency and fairness of Federal court 
operations. In large part, the bill is based on recommendations 
received from the Judicial Conference of the United States 
which is the governing body of the Federal judiciary. The 
Judicial Conference, through a variety of committees 
established by the Conference, continually monitors and 
evaluates court operations. In addition, several provisions of 
the bill incorporate recommendations of the Federal Courts 
Study Committee which Congress created to analyze the courts of 
the United States and develop a long-term plan for the judicial 
system.
    A primary purpose of S. 1887 is to remedy inefficiencies 
and, thereby, to reduce judiciary operating costs. The bill 
makes a variety of improvements in procedures and 
administration with an emphasis on court operations, the 
magistrate judges system, the bankruptcy system, and judiciary 
personnel administration. In addition, the bill will achieve 
immediate cost savings that will benefit both the Federal 
judiciary and the Federal treasury.

                        II. Legislative History

    Contained in S. 1887 are several proposals carried over 
from previous Congresses, as well as a number of new proposals 
supported by the Judicial Conference. This bill was originally 
introduced by Senators Hatch and Heflin on August 1, 1995, as 
S. 1101 at the request of the Judicial Conference.
    The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative 
Oversight and the Courts held a hearing on S. 1101 on October 
24, 1995. Testifying before the subcommittee were the Honorable 
Barefoot Sanders, chairman of the Committee on the Judicial 
Branch; the Honorable Gustave Diamond, U.S. District Court; the 
Honorable Stephen H. Anderson, Committee on Federal-State 
Jurisdiction; the Honorable W. Earl Britt, president, Federal 
Judges Association; John J. Curtin, Jr., American Bar 
Association; Robert L. Fanter, vice president, Defense Research 
Institute; and Loren E. Weiss, National Association of Criminal 
Defense Lawyers.
    Following the hearing, the subcommittee conducted a lengthy 
process to improve the bill and to reach a consensus that was 
agreeable to subcommittee and committee members. Consequently, 
most of the contentious provisions of the bill were eliminated 
through this process of creating a bipartisan modification of 
the bill.
    This modification to S. 1101 was reintroduced by Senators 
Grassley, Hatch, and Heflin as S. 1887, the Federal Court 
Improvements Act of 1996. The bill was amended in subcommittee 
to include reauthorization of the State Justice Institute. On 
July 19, 1996, S. 1887 was polled out of the subcommittee to 
the full committee by a vote of 6 to 0, with one abstention. On 
July 25, 1996, the Judiciary Committee considered S. 1887 and 
reported the bill to the Senate by unanimous consent after 
adopting three amendments.

                      III. Votes of the Committee

    The Senate Judiciary Committee, with a quorum present, met 
on Thursday, July 25, 1996, at 10 a.m. to mark up S. 1887. The 
following rollcall votes occurred on the bill and amendments 
proposed thereto:
    (1) The Thurmond amendment prohibits an award of costs and 
attorney's fees against a judge for actions taken in a judicial 
capacity, unless an action is clearly in excess of the judge's 
jurisdiction.
    The amendment was approved by a roll call vote of 14 yeas 
and 4 nays.
        YEAS                          NAYS
Thurmond                            Biden
Simpson                             Kennedy
Grassley                            Simon
Specter                             Feingold
Brown
Thompson
Kyl
DeWine
Abraham
Hatch
Leahy
Heflin
Kohl
 Feinstein

    (2) The Heflin amendment modifies section 305 of the bill 
which allows judicial officers authority to carry firearms for 
self-defense in all 50 States and the District of Columbia 
under regulations promulgated by the Judicial Conference.
    The amendment was approved by unanimous consent.
    (3) The Kohl amendment allows the disclosure of information 
obtained through discovery or an order restricting access to 
court records in a civil case unless a court makes 
particularized findings of fact to the contrary.
    The amendment was approved by a rollcall vote of 11 yeas 
and 7 nays.
        YEAS                          NAYS
Biden                               Thurmond
Kennedy                             Grassley
Leahy                               Brown
Heflin                              Thompson
Simon                               Kyl
Kohl                                Abraham
Feinstein                           Hatch
Feingold
 Simpson
Specter
DeWine

                    IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

         title i--criminal law and criminal justice amendments

Sec. 101.--New Authority for probation and pretrial services officers

    This section provides Federal authority for probation and 
pretrial services officers to carry firearms under rules 
prescribed by the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts, if approved by the appropriate district 
court.
    Probation and pretrial services officers may presently 
carry weapons under circumstances specified by the Judicial 
Conference only if State law permits. In some jurisdictions, 
State law prohibits or limits these officers from carrying 
weapons, even where the officer has Federal court approval to 
do so. In those States, the personal security of these officers 
is being compromised. Without a Federal statute authorizing 
officers to carry firearms, these officers can encounter legal 
problems in crossing state lines while performing their duties. 
For example, when an officer is working in the community 
supervising offenders near a State border, the officer's State 
authorization to carry firearms may not be legal if the officer 
should cross a state border while conducting normal supervision 
activities. An offender may have a nearby job in an adjacent 
State and the officer must travel to the job site to verify the 
employment.
    Congress has addressed and remedied this problem for the 
employees of other Federal Government agencies involved in the 
criminal justice system, e.g., Bureau of Prisons, 18 U.S.C. 
3050; Drug Enforcement Administration, 21 U.S.C. 878; 
Environmental Protection Agency, 18 U.S.C. 3063; Federal Bureau 
of Investigation, 18 U.S.C. 3052; Postal Service, 18 U.S.C. 
3061; Secret Service, 18 U.S.C. 3056; U.S. Marshals Service, 18 
U.S.C. 3053. This section provides identical legal treatment 
for Federal probation and pretrial officers.

Sec. 102.--Tort Claims Act amendments relating to liability of Federal 
        public defenders

    In Ferri v. Ackerman, 444 U.S. 193 (1979), the Supreme 
Court held that public defenders were not immune from 
malpractice actions. After considering whether to ask Congress 
to amend the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. 2671 et 
seq., to bring Federal public defenders within its coverage, 
the Judicial Conference instead proposed amending the Criminal 
Justice Act to provide malpractice coverage. Such authority was 
added by the Criminal Justice Act Revision of 1986 and is 
currently set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3006A(g)(3). That provision 
authorizes the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts to ``provide representation for and hold 
harmless, or provide liability insurance for'' Federal 
defenders ``for money damages for injury, loss of liberty, loss 
of property, or personal injury or death arising from 
malpractice or negligence * * * in furnishing representational 
services * * * while acting within the scope of that person's 
office or employment.''
    In 1991, the Supreme Court in United States v. Smith, 499 
U.S. 160 (1991), held that the FTCA is the sole vehicle for 
pursuing common law torts against Federal Government employees. 
Following that decision, the seventh circuit held that a 
Federal public defender is an ``employee of the government'' 
for purposes of the FTCA, and the exclusive remedy for alleged 
malpractice would be an action against the United States under 
the FTCA. Sullivan v. U.S., 21 F.3d 198 (7th Cir. 1994).
    The amendment made by this section exempts Federal public 
defender organization officers and employees from the FTCA for 
claims related to representational services and relies instead 
on the malpractice provision of 18 U.S.C. 3006A(g)(3) 
specifically enacted in 1986 to deal with such claims. This 
simplifies the provision of representation to Federal public 
defender employees and avoids creating unnecessary conflicts of 
interest for the United States attorney and the Federal public 
defender.

                title ii--judicial process improvements

Sec. 201.--Duties of magistrate judge on emergency assignment

    This section authorizes magistrate judges temporarily 
assigned to another judicial district because of an emergency 
to dispose of civil cases with the consent of the parties. 
Magistrate judges sitting in their own districts already 
possess this authority. Magistrate judges serving on emergency 
assignment, therefore, would have the same authority as those 
serving in regular status.
    Section 636(f) of title 28 permits the temporary assignment 
of a magistrate judge from one judicial district to another in 
emergency situations upon the concurrence of the chief judges 
of the districts involved. The magistrate judge may perform 
duties specified in section 636 (a) and (b). Subsection (f) was 
added to the Federal Magistrates Act in 1972. The civil consent 
provisions in section 636(c) were enacted in 1979, subsequent 
to the enactment of the emergency provisions. It would appear 
that through oversight no corresponding subsection (f) 
amendment was made in 1979 to permit magistrate judges on 
emergency assignment in another district to enter judgment in 
civil cases upon the consent of the parties. Accordingly, this 
section corrects that oversight.

Sec. 202.--Consent to trial in certain criminal actions

    Under 18 U.S.C. 3401(b), U.S. magistrate judges may not try 
a misdemeanor or petty offense case unless the defendant files 
a written consent to be tried before a magistrate judge and 
specifically waives in writing the right to be tried by an 
article III judge. Before the defendant files such consent, the 
magistrate judge must ``carefully explain'' to the defendant 
that he or she has a right to trial before an article III 
judge. This section removes this restriction in petty offense 
cases, thereby authorizing magistrate judges to try petty 
offense cases without the consent of the defendants. The 
section also authorizes magistrate judges to try class A 
misdemeanor cases upon either written consent or oral consent 
of the defendant on the record.

             Elimination of consent in petty offense cases

    Section 19 of title 18, United States Code, defines a petty 
offense as a class B misdemeanor, a class C misdemeanor, or an 
infraction for which the maximum term of incarceration is 6 
months and the maximum fine is $5,000 for an individual. In 
large part, petty offense cases heard in Federal courts involve 
traffic violations or other violations of regulations governing 
Federal enclaves, including national parks and military bases.
    This section eliminates the option a defendant currently 
has in a proceeding before a magistrate judge to insist on 
article III court disposition of a petty offense. This 
amendment provides an efficient, professional forum for dealing 
with misconduct of a minor nature, most often occurring on 
Federal enclaves and typically remote from article III 
facilities. Most defendants routinely consent to proceeding 
before a magistrate judge.
    However, some defendants purposely decline to consent to a 
trial before a magistrate judge, expecting the prosecution to 
drop the charges rather than incur the expense and 
inconvenience of trial before an article III judge when 
compared to the seriousness of the misconduct. Other defendants 
decline to consent for a variety of different reasons, often 
with a similar result.
    An additional benefit of this section is the elimination of 
the necessity of a complicated procedure on the record for 
obtaining an ``informed consent to proceed'' from each 
defendant. This section, therefore, enhances the efficiency of 
the courts and eliminates abusive manipulation of the system by 
some defendants.
    The committee believes the Federal magistrate judge system 
is mature and well equipped to provide a fair and effective 
means for processing petty offense cases without resort to an 
article III judge. The Judicial Conference has repeatedly 
recognized this capability by endorsing the elimination of 
consent in petty offense cases. In 1979, the Conference favored 
the elimination of consent in petty offense cases during the 
congressional debate over the 1979 amendments to the Federal 
Magistrates Act. In 1981, the Judicial Conference restated its 
support for eliminating consent in ``The Federal Magistrates 
System, Report to the Congress by the Judicial Conference of 
the United States.'' In September 1991, the Judicial Conference 
again endorsed the provision in proposed housekeeping 
legislation that would eliminate a defendant's consent to trial 
by a magistrate judge in petty offense cases.
    Some have argued that a constitutional issue may arise 
because petty offenses require adjudication by an article III 
judge. However, there is no constitutional right to 
adjudication of a petty offense case before an article III 
judge. Palmore v. United States, 411 U.S. 389, 400-403 (1973). 
In addition, there is a longstanding tradition of such matters 
being tried by judicial officers other than article III judges. 
(Committee on the Administration of the Magistrate Judges 
System of the Judicial Conference of the United States, 
December 1, 1995). Moreover, at the time the Constitution was 
ratified, petty offense cases were handled routinely by 
justices of the peace and other lower level judicial officers 
in Britain and in the newly formed States of the United States. 
Doub & Kestenbaum, ``Federal Magistrates for the Trial of Petty 
Offenses: Need and Constitutionality,'' 107 U. Pa. Law Rev. 443 
(1959).

               Oral consent in class A misdemeanor cases

    There is no legal significance between written consent and 
consent made orally on the record, provided that the 
defendant's consent is made with full knowledge of the 
consequences of such consent, is intelligently given, and is 
voluntary. This section preserves such knowing and voluntary 
consent. However, the execution of written consent by each 
class A misdemeanor defendant often unnecessarily prolongs the 
time needed to hear each case. The elimination of the written 
consent requirement saves time and eases burdensome paperwork 
for the magistrate judges and other district court personnel.
    Many of the concerns that led Congress to enact the written 
consent provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3401 in 1979 have receded. 
Congress demonstrated that it is comfortable with the quality 
and competence of magistrate judges and less concerned about 
coerced consent when it relaxed the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 
636(c) governing litigant consent to civil trials by magistrate 
judges in 1990. Similar reasoning is also applicable to 
misdemeanor consent provisions. The new section thus preserves 
the misdemeanor defendant's right to choose adjudication of a 
case by an article III judge while also improving judicial 
efficiency.
    The other changes made by this section bring other statutes 
into conformity with the effects of section 202(a) discussed 
above.

Sec. 203.--Venue in civil actions

    The Judicial Conference considered a recommendation to 
repeal 28 U.S.C. 1392(a), providing that ``Any civil action, 
not of a local nature, against defendants residing in different 
districts in the same State, may be brought in any of such 
districts.'' Based on recent amendments to subsections 1391 
(a)(1) and (b)(1), the Judicial Conference concluded that 
subsection 1392(a) is redundant and should be repealed. This 
section eliminates subsection 1392(a) of title 28, United 
States Code.

Sec. 204.--Registration of judgments for enforcement in other districts

    This section clarifies that in 28 U.S.C. 1963, a judgment 
in an action for recovery of money or property that was entered 
in a court of appeals or a bankruptcy court may also be 
registered for enforcement purposes in any district. Such 
judgments of a district court are currently covered by this 
statute. As a practical matter, bankruptcy courts, as adjuncts 
to the district courts, have been relatively unaffected by the 
present law specifying the district court. However, this change 
is necessary to clarify the statute as to bankruptcy courts and 
to enable courts of appeal judgments to be registered for 
enforcement in other districts. This need arises at the 
appellate level especially in the enforcement of administrative 
law orders which have been appealed to the courts of appeal, 
but are to be enforced at the district level.

Sec. 205.--Vacancy in clerk position; absence of clerk

    While it might be thought self-evident that deputy clerks 
may act for the clerk of court whenever the clerk is unable to 
perform official duties for any reason, the current language of 
28 U.S.C. 954 speaks only to deputy clerks acting in lieu of a 
deceased clerk. This section amends section 954 to clarify that 
deputy clerks may act whenever the clerk cannot perform his or 
her official duties. It also permits the court to designate an 
acting clerk of court, when it is expected that the clerk will 
be unavailable or the office of clerk will be vacant for a 
prolonged period. This section also deletes an obsolete 
provision in section 954 relating to the compensation of a 
deceased clerk of the Supreme Court. A conforming amendment 
changes the chapter's table of contents.

Sec. 206.--Diversity jurisdiction

    This section amends 28 U.S.C. 1332, relating to diversity 
jurisdiction to raise the jurisdictional amount from $50,000 to 
$75,000. The Judicial Conference requested that Congress not 
only increase the threshold amount, but also index it to 
inflation and eliminate the in-state plaintiff in diversity 
jurisdiction cases.
    The committee recognizes the importance of balancing the 
need to assist the Federal judiciary in reducing its increasing 
caseload with the needs of those making use of our Federal 
courts. The committee determined the most reasonable 
modification, at this time, is to raise the jurisdictional 
amount, but not index it, and to leave the in-state plaintiff 
as it is.
    The adjustment of the jurisdictional amount provides claims 
with substantial amounts at issue access to a Federal forum, if 
diversity of citizenship among the parties exists. The most 
recent change in the jurisdictional amount became effective in 
May 1989 pursuant to the Judicial Improvements and Access to 
Justice Act (Public Law No. 100-702), which increased the 
amount from $10,000 to $50,000.

Sec. 207.--Bankruptcy administrator program

    This section provides statutory authority for bankruptcy 
administrators in Alabama and North Carolina to appoint 
bankruptcy case trustees, standing trustees, examiners, and 
committees of creditors and equity security holders, as is done 
in the rest of the country by U.S. trustees. Bankruptcy 
administrators also are given authority to fix standing 
trustee's maximum annual compensation and percentage fee. 
Because subtitle A of title II of the Bankruptcy Judges, United 
States Trustees, and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986 
(Public Law 99-554; 28 U.S.C. 581 note) is not effective in the 
judicial districts in Alabama and North Carolina, this section 
amends the former provisions of the Bankruptcy Code which are 
in effect in those States.
    Experience with the bankruptcy administrator program has 
shown that it is desirable to have bankruptcy administrators 
make these appointments and fix standing trustees' compensation 
and percentage fee. Acting pursuant to regulations adopted by 
the Judicial Conference of the United States and guidelines 
promulgated by the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts, bankruptcy administrators currently make 
recommendations to the court on these matters.
    Authorizing bankruptcy administrators to make these 
appointments and fix standing trustees' compensation and 
percentage fee directly also furthers one of the central goals 
of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, Public Law 95-598, 
freeing bankruptcy judges from an administrative role in their 
cases. Although the 1986 act authorized U.S. trustees to 
perform these functions, it did not specifically authorize 
bankruptcy administrators to do so, even though the two 
officials have similar roles in overseeing the administration 
of estates and supervising trustees and other fiduciaries in 
bankruptcy cases.
    This section also authorizes bankruptcy administrators to 
serve as trustees in bankruptcy cases, when necessary. 
Bankruptcy administrators would be granted the same authority 
to serve as trustees in chapter 7 cases as U.S. trustees, that 
is, when none of the members of the panel of private trustees 
is disinterested and willing to serve in the case. Like U.S. 
trustees, bankruptcy administrators could serve as case 
trustees in chapter 12 and chapter 13 cases and, like assistant 
U.S. trustees, as standing trustees. Assistant U.S. trustees 
are authorized to serve as standing trustees because of 
differences in the way the program is structured.

Sec. 208.--Removal of cases against the United States and Federal 
        officers or agencies

    This section allows civil actions and criminal prosecutions 
against Federal agencies as well as those against Federal 
officers sued in either an individual or official capacity to 
be removed to Federal district court. A Federal forum in such 
cases is important since state court actions against Federal 
agencies and officers often involve complex Federal issues and 
Federal-State conflicts. This bill legislatively reverses the 
Supreme Court's decision in International Primate Protection 
League, et al. v. Administrators of Tulane Educational Fund, et 
al., 111 S.Ct. 1700 (1991), which held that only Federal 
officers, not Federal agencies, may remove State court actions 
to Federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1442(a)(1).
    This section fulfills Congress' intent that questions 
concerning the exercise of Federal authority, the scope of 
Federal immunity and Federal-State conflicts be adjudicated in 
Federal court. It also clarifies that suits against Federal 
agencies, as well as those against Federal officers sued in 
either an individual or official capacity, may be removed to 
Federal district court. This section does not alter the 
requirement that a Federal law defense be alleged for a suit to 
be removable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1442(a)(1).

Sec. 209.--Appeal route in civil cases decided by magistrate judges 
        with consent

    In cases where parties to a civil action have consented to 
case-dispositive authority of a magistrate judge, current law 
permits an appeal of the judgment directly to the court of 
appeals or, as an alternative and if the parties agree, to a 
district judge followed by discretionary review in the court of 
appeals.
    This section eliminates the alternative route of appeal to 
the district judge, as recommended in the Judicial Conference's 
Long Range Plan for the Federal Courts. Although intended as a 
less expensive means of obtaining appellate review, this 
alternative appeal route is inconsistent with the principle 
underlying the ``consent'' authority of magistrate judges--that 
the parties agree to disposition of their case without 
involving a district judge. A single forum of appeal in civil 
consent cases simplifies court procedures and recognizes the 
existing practice in most districts.

Sec. 210.--Reports by judicial councils relating to misconduct and 
        disability orders

    This section requires each Judicial Council to submit an 
annual report to the Administrative Office of the United States 
Courts on the number and nature of orders relating to judicial 
misconduct or disability under 28 U.S.C. 332. This reporting 
requirement was recommended by the Report of the National 
Commission on Judicial Discipline and Removal (August 1993), 
which found that reliable information concerning Council orders 
was difficult to obtain.

Sec. 211.--Protective orders; sealing of cases; disclosure of 
        information

    This section requires that before a judge can enter an 
order restricting the disclosure of information under rule 26 
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure the judge must consider 
the impact of the order on public health and safety. In cases 
where the information is relevant to the protection of public 
health and safety, the judge must determine that the need for 
confidentiality clearly outweighs the public interest in 
disclosure. The judge must also determine that the protective 
order is no broader than necessary to protect the asserted 
privacy interest.
    In addition, this provision invalidates, as contrary to 
public policy, all agreements that prohibit a party from 
disclosing information to a Federal or State agency with 
authority to regulate activity related to the information.

title iii--judiciary personnel administration, benefits and protections

Sec. 301.--Senior judge certification

    This section revises the senior judge work certification 
procedures set forth in 28 U.S.C. 371(f). Currently, retired 
justices and senior judges are required to be certified every 
year in order to receive subsequent salary increases (other 
than cost-of-living increases). If a justice or judge is not 
certified in any year, 28 U.S.C. 371(f)(3) provides that he or 
she is thereafter ineligible to be certified and to receive a 
subsequent salary increase.
    Subsection 301(a) allows for retroactive certification if a 
judge resumes a significant workload. This subsection revises 
28 U.S.C. 371(f)(3) by providing that judges who are not 
certified in one year may perform work in a subsequent year and 
then attribute the subsequent work to the earlier year in order 
to satisfy the certification requirement for the earlier year. 
It further provides that senior judges may not receive credit 
for the same work for more than 1 year.

Sec. 302.--Refund of contribution for deceased deferred annuitant under 
        the judicial survivors' annuities system

    This section is a technical amendment to 28 U.S.C. 
376(o)(1) addressing a contingency not addressed under the 
current statute relating to officials who retire on deferred 
annuities. The question arises, for example, if a judicial 
official retires on a deferred annuity and agrees to continue 
Judicial Survivors' Annuities System (JSAS) contribution during 
the period between leaving office and commencement of the 
annuity, but either dies before making the requisite 18 months 
of contributions for vesting purposes (a possibility for 
individuals who join JSAS during an ``open season'' and retire 
shortly thereafter) or dies without eligible survivors. Under 
the current statute, in cases where a judicial official dies 
without eligible survivors or before his or her JSAS benefits 
have vested, a lump-sum payment of contributions, with 
interest, is made to designated beneficiaries if the judicial 
official ``dies while in office, or while receiving `retirement 
pay'.'' This amendment applies the same policy to a judicial 
official who dies between the time of retirement and 
commencement of annuity payments.

Sec. 303.--Judicial administrative officials retirement matters

    This section provides a greater degree of equity and parity 
in crediting prior Federal service for purposes of retirement 
by the Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts, the Director of the Federal Judicial Center, and 
the Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice of the United 
States. These officials currently may receive a maximum of 5 
years of retirement credit for prior service in any civilian 
Presidential appointment in the executive branch requiring 
Senate confirmation, but they may receive credit for prior 
service in the legislative branch only as a Member of Congress.
    This section allows credit for prior legislative branch 
service of a comparable rank and responsibility to the 
executive branch service that is currently creditable. Credit 
would be allowed to a primary administrative assistant to a 
Member of Congress or as staff director or chief counsel for a 
committee or subcommittee. Although this section limits 
congressional service credit to high-level positions, it 
further requires that the person serving in the position have 
served in that capacity for at least 5 years or at a salary 
that is within the top 10 percent of salaries for congressional 
staff at the time of the service. The other changes to 28 
U.S.C. 611 and 627 are clarifying and conforming amendments.

Sec. 304.--Bankruptcy judges reappointment procedure

     This section amends the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal 
Judgeship Act of 1984, Public Law No. 98-353, 120, as amended 
by Public Law No. 99-554, 102, 100 Stat. 3089, to authorize the 
Judicial Conference to prescribe regulations which provide for 
the reappointment of incumbent bankruptcy judges that differ 
from the initial appointment of bankruptcy judges.
    The Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984 
articulated strict, specifically detailed ethical and 
scholastic standards for the selection of U.S. bankruptcy 
judges to ensure that such selections are governed by merit, 
character, and scholastic ability. This act also requires the 
judicial council for each circuit, or a merit selection panel, 
if so convened by the council, to screen and review the 
qualifications of applicants, using strict criteria specific 
both by the act and by accompanying regulations issued by the 
Judicial Conference of the United States. These procedures are 
thorough and time-consuming, both for the applicants and the 
reviewers. These procedures are unnecessary, however, in the 
case of applicants who are incumbent bankruptcy judges. The 
information regarding an incumbent's merit, scholarship, 
judicial temperament, etc., is no longer a matter which a 
judicial council or a merit selection screening panel need 
attempt to ascertain; they are facts, amply supported by a 14-
year-old record. Thus, this section simply eliminates 
unnecessary expenditures of time and money.

Sec. 305.--Carrying of firearms

    This section authorizes Federal judges, including 
magistrate judges and bankruptcy judges, to carry firearms for 
purposes of personal security under regulations prescribed by 
the Judicial Conference. Although the United States Marshals 
Service already provides protection for judges upon specific 
threats, judges need authority to protect themselves against 
unidentified dangers.
    The need for preemptive Federal legislation is pointed out 
by the fact that judges carrying firearms when crossing 
municipal or state boundaries on a daily or frequent basis may 
be violating local laws. A Federal Statute preempting State law 
as to Federal judges is needed in that eight States and the 
District of Columbia currently prohibit non-exempt citizens 
from carrying firearms.
    The Department of Justice, which supports the goals of this 
section, raised a number of concerns with the original language 
as reported out of subcommittee. At full committee, Senator 
Heflin offered an amendment, which addressed most of those 
concerns, and the committee adopted the amendment unanimously.
    The amendment deleted language from the bill that granted 
judges immunity from suit with regard to the use of such 
firearms; the amendment added language to strengthen the bill's 
requirement that judges demonstrate proficiency in the use, 
safety and maintenance of firearms; language was added 
directing the Department of Justice to cooperate with the 
Judicial Conference, upon request, with respect to such 
training; and the amendment made it clear that judges are not 
authorized to carry firearms aboard aircraft or other common 
carriers.
    The section also allows for a delay in the effective date 
of the provision in order to allow the Judicial Conference to 
establish and promulgate regulations on the carrying of 
firearms by Federal judicial officers. These regulations will 
address training and weapons qualifications requirements.

Sec. 306.--Technical correction related to commencement date of 
        temporary judgeships

    When the Federal Judgeship Act was passed in 1990, it 
created, among other things, both permanent judgeships and a 
temporary judgeship in two district courts, the Eastern 
District of Missouri and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 
This section eliminates potential confusion about the date on 
which the temporary judgeship will lapse. When these judgeship 
positions have been filled, the source of the position has been 
identified as the Federal Judgeship Act of 1990 without 
specifying whether the position being filled is the permanent 
or the temporary position.
    The amended language of the 1990 act creating temporary 
judgeships specifies that the first vacancy occurring 5 years 
after the confirmation of the judge appointed to fill the 
position shall not be filled. Without more specificity on which 
of the judgeships is the temporary position, uncertainty exists 
as to the date on when the position will lapse.
    This section eliminates that confusion by specifying that 
the last of the judgeships (created by this act in these two 
districts) filled shall be the temporary position. In this 
manner, the legislation will more fully comport with the intent 
of the temporary judgeship positions by assuring that the 
courts have the benefit of those temporary judgeships for at 
least the 5-year period specified in the act.

Sec. 307.--Full-time status of court reporters

    This section corrects an inequity caused by the unique 
nature of court reporter work that unjustly penalizes court 
reporters at retirement. Sections 8339(o) and 8415(e) of title 
5 were added in 1986 by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 
of 1985 to eliminate the availability of windfall retirement 
annuities for part-time employees. The Office of Personnel 
Management has issued a formal opinion which could deprive 
court reporters who are not on a regularly scheduled 40 hour 
weekly tour of duty in the courthouse of a full retirement 
annuity, irrespective of receipt of a full-time salary and 
concomitant full retirement contributions. Under this opinion, 
court reporters who wish to receive a retirement annuity based 
upon ``full-time'' service (as opposed to part-time service and 
a resulting reduction in annuity) must either (a) work a 
scheduled tour of duty in the courthouse of 80 hours per pay 
period; or (b) maintain records of the actual hours worked on 
Federal business and work a minimum of 2080 hours per year on 
that business. However, court reporters work irregular hours 
and may not work the entire 40 hours in the courthouse. This 
section remedies this by providing that court reporters who are 
paid a full-time salary will be treated like full-time 
employees for retirement purposes.
    In order that annuities not be reduced solely due to the 
lack of a regularly scheduled tour of duty if the reporter is 
paid a full salary as fixed by the Judicial Conference, the 
Conference in September 1988 recommended the proposed 
legislative change to define court reporters as ``full-time'' 
employees for annuity purposes if they are paid full-time 
salaries.

Sec. 308.--Court interpreters

    This section cures what was an unanticipated statutory 
restriction on the Federal courts' ability to respond to the 
needs of hearing-impaired persons participating in court 
proceedings. The Court Interpreters Act at 28 U.S.C. 1827 
(d)(1) and (e)(2) authorizes the provision of paid interpreting 
services to the hearing-impaired (as well as to non-English 
speakers), but only to parties and witnesses and only in 
criminal cases or civil actions instituted by the United 
States. At 28 U.S.C. 1827(g)(4) and 1828(b) (with regard to 
special interpretation services), the act provides that such 
services may be provided in other proceedings with the approval 
of the presiding judicial officer, but only on a cost-
reimbursable basis.
    Especially in recent years, since the enactment of the 
Americans with Disabilities Act, hearing-impaired persons in a 
variety of circumstances, such as debtors in bankruptcy cases, 
parties in private civil cases, attorneys representing private 
clients, and others, have requested Federal courts to provide 
them with sign language interpreters so that they may 
meaningfully participate in court proceedings. No matter how 
sympathetic a presiding judge may be to such requests, however, 
because of the restriction in the Court Interpreters Act, the 
courts have been limited to providing this service on a 
reimbursable basis.
    This section promotes accommodation to this class of 
disabled persons by vesting judicial officers with the 
discretion to provide sign language interpreters at court 
expense, subject to the availability of funds, to any 
participant in any type of judicial proceeding. Other 
provisions of the Court Interpreters Act remain unchanged, 
however, so that the provision of interpretation services for 
Government witnesses, for example, remains the financial 
responsibility of the Department of Justice under 28 U.S.C. 
1827(g)(3).

Sec. 309.--Technical amendment related to commencement date of 
        temporary bankruptcy judgeships

    Temporary judgeships were first established for bankruptcy 
judges in the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 1992 (the 1992 act), 
which authorized 10 temporary judgeship positions. Temporary 
judgeship positions are intended to provide a court with a 
needed judgeship for a minimum of 5 years. However, the 
language of section 3(b) of the 1992 act followed language used 
for article III judges, which provided that a vacancy occurring 
5 years or more after the date of the enactment of the act 
shall not be filled.
    By linking the temporary judgeship terms (5 years) to the 
enactment date of a particular judgeship act, a district could 
lose most or all of the benefit of an authorized temporary 
judgeship position. The period between the effective date of a 
particular judgeship act and the time new judges actually take 
office to fill newly created positions is often years, due to 
delays in funding and selection processes.
    The article III judiciary has had temporary judgeships for 
years and has struggled with the harsh effects of linking the 
5-year period to the date of enactment of the particular 
judgeship act. Congress recognized this problem and passed 
legislation to amend the commencement date of certain temporary 
article III judgeships in Public Law 104-60.

Sec. 310.--Contribution rate for senior judges under the Judicial 
        Survivors' Annuities System

    This section corrects an anomaly between categories of 
disabled judges and their rate of contribution to the Judicial 
Survivors' Annuities System (JSAS) and provides equal treatment 
for all disabled judges. Currently, a senior judge who is 
disabled and retires under 28 U.S.C. 371(b) (senior status) 
contributes to the JSAS at a rate of 2.2 percent. However, a 
disabled judge who retires under 28 U.S.C. 372(a) (permanent 
disability) contributes to JSAS at a rate of 3.5 percent unless 
he or she is ``willing and able'' to work. This section applies 
a 2.2-percent contribution rate to all senior article III 
judges and all retired judges of the U.S. Court of Federal 
Claims.

Sec. 311.--Prohibition of awards of costs, including attorney's fees, 
        and injunctive relief against judicial officers

    This section restores the doctrine of judicial immunity to 
the status it occupied prior to the Supreme Court's decision in 
Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984), and has the support of 
the American Judges Association, the Conference of Chief Judges 
of the National Center for State Courts, and the American Bar 
Association. Legislation identical to section 311 was 
introduced as S. 1115 by Senator Thurmond in this Congress on 
August 3, 1995. Nearly identical bills were also introduced, 
and the subject of hearings in previous years, including the 
100th, the 101st and the 102d Congresses. While the Committee 
favorably reported these bills in each of three Congresses, the 
full Senate never considered them. See S. Rept. 556, 100th 
Cong., 2d sess. (1988); S. Rept. 465, 101st Cong., 2d sess. 
(1990); S. Rept. 224, 102d Cong., 1st sess. (1991).
    In Pulliam, the Supreme Court broke with 400 years of 
common-law tradition and weakened judicial immunity 
protections. The case concerned a State magistrate who jailed 
an individual for failing to post bond for an offense which 
could be punished only by a fine and not incarceration. The 
defendant filed an action under 42 U.S.C. 1983, obtaining both 
an injunction against the magistrate's practice of requiring 
bonds for nonincarcerable offenses, and an award of costs, 
including attorney's fees. The Supreme Court affirmed, 
expressly holding that judicial immunity is not a bar to 
injunctive relief in section 1983 actions against a State judge 
acting in a judicial capacity, or to the award of attorney's 
fees under the Civil Rights Attorney Fees Award Act, 42 U.S.C. 
1988. Those statutes are now amended to preclude awards of 
costs and attorney's fees against judges for acts taken in 
their judicial capacity, and to bar injunctive relief unless 
declaratory relief is inadequate.
    In the 12 years since Pulliam, thousands of Federal cases 
have been filed against judges and magistrates. The 
overwhelming majority of these cases lack merit and are 
ultimately dismissed. The record from the Committee's previous 
hearings on this issue is replete with examples of judges 
having to defend themselves against frivolous cases. Even when 
cases are routinely dismissed, the very process of defending 
against those actions is vexatious and subjects judges to undue 
expense. More importantly, the risk to judges of burdensome 
litigation creates a chilling effect that threatens judicial 
independence and may impair the day-to-day decisions of the 
judiciary in close or controversial cases.
    Subsection 311(a) codifies the general prohibition against 
holding judicial officers (justices, judges and magistrates) 
liable for costs, including attorney's fees, for acts or 
omissions taken in their judicial capacity. Subsection 311(b) 
amends 42 U.S.C. 1988 to prohibit holding judicial officers 
liable for costs or fees. Subsection 311(c) amends 42 U.S.C. 
1983 to bar a Federal judge from granting injunctive relief 
against a State judge, unless declaratory relief is unavailable 
or the State judge violated a declaratory decree. In short, 
subsection (a) states the general rule, while subsections (b) 
and (c) specifically address the statutes at issue in Pulliam. 
The legislation extends protection to Federal as well as State 
judicial officers out of concern that Federal judges otherwise 
might be subject to cost and fee awards in cases alleging 
Federal constitutional torts. See, e.g., Bivens v. Six Unknown 
Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 
(1977); Butz v. Economu, 438 U.S. 478 (1978).
    This section does not provide absolute immunity for 
judicial officers. Immunity is not granted for any conduct 
``clearly in excess'' of a judge's jurisdiction, even if the 
act is taken in a judicial capacity. Moreover, litigants may 
still seek declaratory relief, and may obtain injunctive relief 
if a declaratory decree is violated or is otherwise 
unavailable. Section 311 restores the full scope of judicial 
immunity lost in Pulliam and will go far in eliminating 
frivolous and harassing lawsuits which threaten the 
independence and objective decision-making essential to the 
judicial process.

              title iv--judicial financial administration

Sec. 401.--Increase in civil action filing fee

    In September 1992, the Judicial Conference, noting that 
civil filing fees had been increased from $15 to $60 in 1978 
and from $60 to $120 in 1986, recommended that 28 U.S.C. 
1914(a) be amended to increase the civil filing fee from $120 
to $150.
    This section increases the filing fee for civil actions in 
the district courts under 28 U.S.C. 1914 from $120 to $150. 
This modest adjustment affects only the initial ``user fee'' 
for all litigants not proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 
U.S.C. 1915. Although the initial filing fee of some State 
courts of General jurisdiction may be less, many States have 
add-on fees. For example, in 26 States courts charge a jury 
demand fee which can be as high as $300, according to the 
National Center for State Courts. Also, actual reimbursement 
fees for jury trials ordered in certain judgments run much 
higher, depending upon the length of trial. Other States impose 
a fee for filing an answer, requesting a trial, or filing a 
motion.
    Additionally, this section amends 28 U.S.C. 1931 to have 
the first $90 (rather than $60) of each fee deposited into the 
special judiciary fund in the Treasury to be available to 
offset funds appropriated for the operation and maintenance of 
the courts. As a result, the judiciary would receive about $6.6 
million annually, according to the Judicial Conference, thereby 
reducing the need for direct appropriations.
    The section provides for a 60-day delay in the effective 
date in the proposed increase to the civil filing fee. This 
delay would allow clerks of court to implement the filing fee 
increase.

Sec. 402. Interpreter performance examination fees

    Since the enactment in 1978 of the Court Interpreters Act, 
28 U.S.C. 1827, the Administrative Office has been responsible 
for the development and administration of interpreter 
certification examinations. From 1985 to the present, the 
Administrative Office has contracted with the University of 
Arizona to perform this function. Under this contract, the 
contractor may charge a fee to offset costs of developing and 
administering the exam. For the Spanish certification exam, the 
fees collected by the University defray a significant portion 
of the cost.
    While this contracting approach has been followed for 
almost a decade, a review of the program has raised some 
concerns about the validity of contract language permitting the 
contractor to collect fees and budget funds without clear 
statutory authorization. Accordingly, this section amends 28 
U.S.C. 1827 to expressly authorize the Director of the 
Administrative Office to prescribe fees for examinations given 
for the purpose of certifying qualified interpreters, and to 
permit the contractor to collect and retain some or all of the 
fees as direct payment for contract services. The section also 
validates such provisions in current and past contracts. Any 
funds collected after this section takes effect that are not 
retained by a contractor are to be deposited into the 
offsetting fund established under 28 U.S.C. 1931.

Sec. 403.--Judicial panel on multidistrict litigation

    Several provisions of title 28, United States Code, 
authorize the Judicial Conference to establish miscellaneous 
fee schedules for the Federal, appellate, district, claims and 
bankruptcy courts. The Judiciary's 1991 Appropriations Act 
provided permanent authority for fees charged for electronic 
public access to these courts' databases to be deposited into 
the Judiciary Automation Fund, which pays the costs of 
providing those services. Currently, the Judicial Panel on 
Multidistrict Litigation is included in these statutes. The 
purpose of this section is to establish conformity in the 
Federal judiciary by authorizing the Judicial Conference to 
establish a miscellaneous fee schedule for the panel and by 
authorizing the deposit of electronic public access fees 
collected by the panel into the Judiciary Automation Fund.

Sec. 404.--Disposition of Fees

    This section allows the judiciary to retain the revenue 
from increases above current levels in (1) attorney admission 
fees, (2) duplicate admission certificates, and (3) 
certificates of good standing. It is anticipated that if such 
legislation were enacted, the Judicial Conference would raise 
the attorney admission fee from $20 to $50, and raise fees for 
duplicate judiciary certificates and certificates of good 
standing from $5 to $15. This would provide about $2 million 
annually for the judiciary.
    This section also allows the judiciary to retain additional 
revenues derived from increases in fees for filing an adversary 
complaint in bankruptcy cases. Item 6 of the Bankruptcy Court 
Miscellaneous Fee Schedule, which was adopted by the Judicial 
Conference pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1930, provides that the fee 
charged for filing a complaint be the same amount as the filing 
fee prescribed in 28 U.S.C. 1914(a) for instituting any civil 
action other than a writ of habeas corpus.
    Additionally, this section provides that the additional $30 
from each bankruptcy complaint filing is to be deposited into 
the special judiciary fund in the Treasury. These revenues 
would be available to offset funds appropriated for the 
operation and maintenance of the courts.

        title v--federal courts study committee recommendations

Sec. 501.--Parties' consent to bankruptcy judge's findings and 
        conclusions of law

    Section 157(c)(1) of title 28, United States Code, provides 
that a bankruptcy judge may hear a noncore proceeding that is 
otherwise related to a case under title 11 and, in such 
proceeding, shall submit to the district court proposed 
findings of fact and conclusions of law. Any final order or 
judgment must be entered by the district judge after 
considering the findings of fact and conclusions of law and 
reviewing any matters to which any party has ``timely and 
specifically objected.'' Even when no party objects to what the 
bankruptcy judge has proposed, the bankruptcy judge may not 
proceed to enter appropriate orders and judgments without 
``express'' consent of all of the parties as provided in the 
Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.
    Subsection (c)(1) proceedings are to be distinguished from 
subsection (c)(2) proceedings in which all parties have agreed 
at the outset that the bankruptcy judge may hear, determine, 
and enter appropriate orders and judgments, subject only to 
regular appeal procedures.
    The result is that subsection (c)(1) proceedings impose a 
time-consuming procedure on the system that is extremely and 
unnecessarily wasteful of article III judicial resources by 
requiring article III judge consideration of findings of fact 
and conclusions of law proposed by the bankruptcy judge to 
which there is no objection by any of the parties and article 
III judge entry of appropriate orders and judgments. Moreover, 
in default cases, implied consent is particularly important to 
prevent unnecessary delays.
    This section deals with the problem by amending subsection 
(c)(1) to provide that a party will be deemed to have consented 
to the findings of fact and conclusions of law proposed by the 
bankruptcy judge unless the party files a timely objection--
within 10 days under rule 9033 of the Federal Rules of 
Bankruptcy Procedure--after which time the findings and 
conclusions become final and the bankruptcy judge may enter an 
appropriate order in the case. By making provision for implied 
consent in the absence of timely objection, this section 
resolves the problem of totally unnecessary delay in default 
cases where persons cannot be located, promotes the economic 
use of both judicial and party resources where no party in fact 
objects, and does so without denying an objecting party the 
opportunity to seek article III de novo consideration of 
noncore proceedings.

Sec. 502.--Qualification of chief judge of Court of International Trade

    Under existing 28 U.S.C. 251(b), the President designates 
one of the nine judges of the court, who is less than 70 years 
old, to serve as chief judge. The designated chief judge 
continues to serve as chief judge until the judge reaches the 
age of 70 and the President designates another judge chief 
judge.
    The method for selecting the chief judges of the other 
article III courts provides that the chief judge of the court 
shall be the judge in regular service who is senior in 
commission of those judges who (a) is 64 years of age or under; 
(b) has served as a judge of the court for at least 1 year; and 
(c) has not previously served as chief judge.
    This method of selection was reviewed by the Federal Courts 
Study Committee, which recommended that this method not be 
changed. In particular, the committee report stated:

          The modified seniority method of chief judge 
        selection established in 1982 (see 28 U.S.C. 45 & 136) 
        is not faultless, but it operates well in practice and 
        is preferable to any other method. The statutorily 
        specified term for chief judges is a definite 
        improvement over the previous pattern of very short or 
        very long periods of service.

    This section changes the system for selecting the chief 
judge of the Court of International Trade to conform with the 
modified seniority system applicable to every other article III 
court. This significantly improves the political selection of a 
chief judge by the President and has the support of the 
Judicial Conference of the United States.

Sec 503.--Judicial cost-of-living adjustments

    This section repeals a provision enacted in a continuing 
appropriation resolution in 1981 that bars annual cost-of-
living adjustments in pay for Federal judges except as 
specifically authorized by Congress. While the sponsors of the 
provision applied it only to a single year, the Comptroller 
General ruled that it was permanent law. However, the 
Comptroller General recommended repeal of section 140 of Public 
Law 97-92 to the 99th Congress. Instead, Congress adopted the 
practice of suspending application of section 140 to discrete 
cost-of-living raises. Repeal of section 140 restores the 
operation of 28 U.S.C. 461 as to article III judges and parity 
with the other two branches of Government, as enacted by the 
Federal Salary Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act of 1975 and 
amended by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989.

                        title vi--miscellaneous

Sec. 601.--Participation in judicial governance activities by district, 
        senior, and magistrate judges

    Currently, 28 U.S.C. 331 provides, in relevant part, that 
``[t]he district judge to be summoned [to the Judicial 
Conference] from each judicial circuit shall be chosen by the 
circuit and district judges of the circuit at the annual 
judicial conference of the circuit held pursuant to section 333 
of this title *  *  * .'' In 1990, 28 U.S.C. 333 was amended to 
permit the circuit judicial conferences to be held biennially 
instead of annually. This raised the question of whether the 
circuit and district judges could elect their district court 
representative to the Judicial Conference without holding an 
annual meeting. The General Counsel's office of the 
Administrative Office of the United States Courts concluded 
that it was reasonable to assume the judges could make this 
decision without a formal meeting, but recommended a technical 
amendment. Accordingly, this section amends 28 U.S.C. 331 to 
authorize each judicial conference to choose a representative 
in accordance with rules adopted by the judicial conference of 
the circuit.

Sec. 602.--The Director and Deputy Director of the Administrative 
        Office as officers of the United States

    The Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-650) 
changed the authority for appointment of the Director and 
Deputy Director of the Administrative Office from the Supreme 
Court to the Chief Justice (after consulting with the Judicial 
Conference). In so doing, it appears Congress inadvertently 
eliminated these two positions from the definition of 
``officer'' of the United States under 5 U.S.C. 2104, which 
defines an ``officer of the United States'' for purposes of 
title 5, United States Code. While qualification of these 
positions under the definition of ``employee'' of the United 
States prevents inadvertent disqualification for certain 
benefits, the positions should be clearly included under the 
term ``officer.''

Sec. 603.--Removal of action from State court

    This section conforms 28 U.S.C. 1446(c)(1) to the language 
in the rest of the section by substituting ``defendant or 
defendants'' for ``petitioner.''

Sec. 604.--Federal Judicial Center employee retirement provisions

    This section clarifies 28 U.S.C. 627(b) to remove any doubt 
that eligible Federal Judicial Center staff, including the 
Deputy Director, are covered by the Federal Employees 
Retirement System (FERS) under 5 U.S.C. 8401 et seq.

Sec. 605.--Abolition of the Special Court, Regional Rail 
        Reauthorization Act of 1973

    This section abolishes the Special Court that was 
established in the early 1970's to oversee the reorganization 
of insolvent railroads. That court's caseload has declined to 
less than 10 cases, none of which involve significant activity. 
The section transfers the Special Court's jurisdiction over 
those cases and any future rail reorganization proceedings to 
the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where the 
court's records and a majority of its judges are currently 
located, and makes other changes incidental to the court's 
abolition. As there is already an established, uniform body of 
law regarding these matters, it is easier to maintain that 
unified body of law within one court. Further, the precedential 
value of the Special Court will be retained and the 
jurisprudence of the Special Court will be adopted by the 
District Court for the District of Columbia for the purpose of 
deciding these cases.
    More specifically, subsection (a) amends 45 U.S.C. 719 to 
provide that the Special Court is abolished after a 90-day 
transition period. At the end of the transition period, the 
District Court for the District of Columbia assumes 
responsibility for the Special Court's remaining docket and 
acquires the latter's exclusive, nationwide jurisdiction under 
the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973, the Northeast 
Rail Service Act of 1981, the Conrail Privatization Act, and 
related statutes. Subsection (a) also deems all statutory or 
regulatory references to the Special Court to refer to the 
District Court for the District of Columbia for purposes of any 
proceedings after the Special Court is abolished.
    Subsection (b) provides that appeals in rail reorganization 
cases decided by the District Court for the District of 
Columbia shall lie in the Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit.
    Subsection (c) makes necessary conforming amendments. 
Subsection (d) provides that cases pending at the time of the 
Special Court's abolition will be assigned to the District 
Court for the District of Columbia as if they had been filed 
originally in that court. Subsection (e) provides that the 
amendments concerning appellate review and the conforming 
amendments become effective 90 days after enactment. The 
appellate review amendments, however, do not apply to any final 
order or judgment entered by the Special Court, which is a 
three-judge court, for which a petition for writ of certiorari 
has already been filed or the time for filing such petition has 
not expired.

Sec. 606.--Place of holding court in the District Court of Utah

    This section implements the endorsement of the Judicial 
Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case 
Management to add Provo and St. George as a place of holding 
court in the District of Utah. The committee's endorsement was 
influenced by the fact that the District Court for the District 
of Utah made a budget-neutral proposal.
    In a letter to Robert Hoecker, circuit executive for the 
Tenth Judicial Circuit, dated May 10, 1996, the Honorable David 
Winder, chief judge for the District Court for the District of 
Utah, stated that the court did not intend to request or pursue 
funding for the acquisition of a building site or the 
construction of court facilities in either location. In 
addition, Chief Judge Winder indicated that the court did not 
intend, in the near future, to seek rental space in either 
location for the purpose of conducting court.

Sec. 607.--Exception of residency requirement for district judges 
        appointed to the Southern District and Eastern District of New 
        York

    This section amends 28 U.S.C. 134(b) to allow judges from 
the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York to reside within 
20 miles of the district to which they were appointed.
    Title 28 U.S.C. 134(b) requires district court judges to 
reside in the district to which they were appointed. The 
underlying policy for this statute is that judges should reside 
in the community in which they administer the law. Because of 
its unique geographic status, judges appointed to the District 
of Columbia District are already exempt from this requirement.
    As with judges, and for similar policy reasons, U.S. 
attorneys are required to reside in the district to which they 
are appointed. However, there are three exceptions to this 
requirement: the District of Columbia; the Eastern District of 
New York; and the Southern District of New York. In these three 
exceptions, the U.S. attorneys may reside within 20 miles of 
the district. This section applies the same residency 
requirements presently in effect for U.S. attorneys in the 
Southern and Eastern Districts of New York to Federal district 
judges in those districts.

Sec. 608.--Extension of civil justice expense and delay reduction 
        reports on pilot and demonstration programs.

    Section 608 amends sections 104(d) and 105(c) of the Civil 
Justice Reform Act (CJRA) of 1990 to extend to June 30, 1997, 
the date by which the Judicial Conference is required to submit 
reports on the CJRA demonstration program and the CJRA pilot 
program.
    Section 105 of the CJRA requires the Judicial Conference to 
transmit to Congress a final report containing recommendations 
on the implementation of cost and delay reduction programs in 
the Federal district courts. These recommendations are to be 
based on the results of the independent assessment of the CJRA 
pilot and comparison courts presently being conducted by the 
RAND Corporation.
    Section 104 of the CJRA imposes the additional requirement 
that the Judicial Conference submit a separate report on the 
district courts that participated in the act's demonstration 
program. For the sake of consistency, section 104 of the CJRA 
is amended to state that this report is also due on June 30, 
1997.

Sec. 609.--Extension of arbitration

    This section extends the authorization of appropriations of 
the use of arbitration by certain district courts under 28 
U.S.C. 651 by 1 year.

Sec. 610.--State Justice Institute

            Subsection (a)--Authorization of appropriations
    Subsection (a) amends section 215 of the State Justice 
Insititute Act of 1984 (``Act''), 42 U.S.C. 10713, by 
authorizing annual appropriations of $12,500,000 for fiscal 
year 1997, fiscal year 1998, fiscal year 1999, and fiscal year 
2000. The amendment also provides that amounts appropriated for 
the Institute are to remain available until expended, and new 
restrictions are placed on the disbursement of funds.
    The Institute is unique in statutory duty to ``further the 
development and adoption of improved judicial administration in 
State courts in the United States.'' [42 U.S.C. 10702(a)]. The 
Institute has the only authority to assist all State courts and 
the only mandate to share the success of one State's 
innovations with every State and the Federal court system. Its 
duties include fostering coordination and cooperation with the 
Federal judiciary in areas of mutual concern, and it is 
authorized to participate in joint projects with other 
agencies, including the Federal Judicial Center.
    The Institute plays an important role in the Nation's 
response to crime by providing necessary funding to support 
projects that evaluate the effectiveness of new trial and 
sentencing approaches, and improve judges' performance in cases 
involving violent crimes and drug abuse. The Institute also has 
been a leader in fostering improvements in the civil justice 
system by supporting efforts to evaluate new procedures to 
reduce litigation delay, demonstrate innovative alternative 
dispute resolution programs and increase the public's access to 
the legal system.
    The Institute has several national roles that are not 
filled by other entities. They include for example:
    Supporting national evaluations of promising State and 
local improvements to the criminal and civil justice systems;
    Serving as an information clearinghouse to share 
information quickly on a nationwide basis; and
    Establishing national resource centers where judges and 
court officials can test new technologies, observe new 
approaches to administering court systems and sit in classroom 
settings to learn from each other.
            Subsection (b)--Executive committee
    Subsection (b) amends section 204(j) of the act, 42 U.S.C. 
10703(j), by inserting the phrase ``(on such occasions as it 
has been delegated the authority to act for the Board)'' after 
``executive committee of the Board.'' This amendment would 
require meetings of a committee of the board of directors to be 
open to the public only when the board had delegated the 
committee the authority to conduct or dispose of Institute 
business on its behalf.
            Subsection (c)--Howell Heflin Award
    Subsection (c) adds a new subsection (7) to section 204(k) 
of the act, 42 U.S.C. 10703(k), directing the Institute's board 
of directors to present an annual Howell Heflin Award in 
recognition of an innovative SJI-funded project that has a high 
likelihood of significantly improving the quality of justice in 
State courts across the Nation.
            Subsection (d)--Priority in making awards
    Subsection (d) amends section 206(b) of the act, 42 U.S.C. 
10705(b), by inserting a new paragraph (1) according State and 
local courts, and their agencies, the highest funding priority 
under the Act.
            Subsection (e)--Geographical distribution of grants
    Subsection (e) adds a new paragraph (7) to section 206(b) 
of the act, 42 U.S.C. 10705(b), directing the Institute to 
undertake outreach efforts to assure the widest feasible 
geographical distribution of grant funds and benefits, 
consistent with its mission to award grants having the greatest 
likelihood of improving the quality of justice nationwide.
            Subsection (f)--Nonsupplantation
    Subsection (f) of the bill extends the nonsupplantation 
provision of section 207(d) of the act, 42 U.S.C. 10706(d), to 
private organizations, and restricts the use of Institute grant 
funds awarded to bar associations.
            Subsection (g)--Reports to Congress
    Subsection (g) requires that, beginning January 1, 1997, 
the Institute provide semi-annual reports to the Senate and 
House Judiciary Committees identifying all grants made by the 
Institute during the preceding 6 months, including the name and 
address of the grantee, the purpose of the project, the amount 
of funding provided, and the duration of the project.

                     V. Regulatory Impact Statement

    Pursuant to paragraph 11(b), rule XXVI of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, the committee, after due consideration, 
concludes that Senate bill 1887 will not have significant 
regulatory impact.

                           VI. Cost Estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, September 6, 1996.
Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S.1887, the Federal 
Courts Improvement Act of 1996.
    Enacting S. 1887 would affect direct spending. Therefore, 
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply to this bill.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them.
            Sincerely,
                                              James L. Blum
                                   (For June E. O'Neill, Director).
    Enclosure.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE--Cost estimate

    1. Bill number: S. 1887.
    2. Bill title: Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1996.
    3. Bill status: As reported by the Senate Committee on the 
Judiciary on July 30, 1996.
    4. Bill purpose: S. 1887 would make numerous operational 
and administrative changes to the federal court system. 
Provisions that would have significant budgetary effects 
include section 309, which would allow the terms of certain 
bankruptcy judgeships to be extended; sections 401 and 404, 
which would increase offsetting receipts and the spending of 
such receipts by increasing civil filing fees and other 
miscellaneous fees; and section 610, which would authorize 
appropriations for the State Justice Institute.
    5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: As shown in 
the following table, enacting S. 1887 would increase 
discretionary spending by $52 million over the 1997-2002 
period, subject to the availability of appropriated funds, and 
would increase mandatory spending by $1 million over the same 
period.

                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        1997      1998      1999      2000      2001      2002  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                  
                                                                                                                
Estimated authorization level.......................        13        14        13        13     (\1\)     (\1\)
Estimated outlays...................................         3         9        12        13        10         5
                                                                                                                
                                           CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING                                           
                                                                                                                
Estimated budget authority..........................     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)
Estimated outlays...................................     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)     (\1\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Less than $500,000.                                                                                         

    The costs of this bill fall within budget function 750.
    6. Basis of estimate: The only substantial budgetary impact 
from enacting S. 1887 would result from the authorization of 
appropriations for the State Justice Institute. The bill would 
authorize $12.5 million a year for the fiscal years 1997 
through 2000. If these amounts are appropriated, additional 
outlays would total $50 million over the 1997-2002 period. This 
organization received an appropriation of $5 million for fiscal 
year 1996. Other provisions of the bill are discussed below.

Title I

    Section 101 of this title would allow probation officers 
and pretrial officers to carry firearms with the approval of 
Federal district courts and according to the rules and 
regulations prescribed by the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts (AOUSC). Currently, the Judicial 
Conference of the United States maintains an informal policy 
that enables these officers to carry firearms if allowed under 
existing state and local law. As a result of this policy, a 
firearms training program is in operation and surplus firearms 
from other agencies are provided to the officers in the 
program. Thus far, overall expenses for this program have been 
minimal. According to the AOUSC, about 60 percent of the 
probation officers and pretrial services officers currently 
carry firearms, and enacting this bill would probably not 
increase participation in the firearms program significantly. 
Thus, CBO estimates that enacting this provision would not have 
a significant budgetary impact.
    Section 102 would eliminate malpractice coverage for 
federal public defenders under the Federal Tort Claims Act 
(Public Law 89-506). Because public defenders would still be 
eligible for malpractice coverage under the Criminal Justice 
Act Revision of 1986 (Public Law 99-651), CBO estimates that 
enacting this provision would have no impact on the Federal 
budget.

Title II

    This title contains two provisions that could affect the 
number of cases that are tried in Federal courts. First, 
section 206 would increase the threshold for diversity cases, 
which are cases between citizens of different States, that can 
be heard in Federal court, from $50,000 to $75,000. According 
to the AOUSC, increasing this threshold would exclude about 
3,000 to 6,000 civil cases each year from access to Federal 
courts. Because the courts' backlog for civil cases is so 
large, CBO estimates that any reduction in caseload would have 
a negligible impact on the budget for the Federal court system.
    Second, section 208 would allow civil actions and criminal 
actions against Federal agencies and federal officers to be 
removed from state court to a federal district court. According 
to the National Center for State Courts, very few of these 
cases are currently tried in State court. Hence, CBO estimates 
that enacting this provision would not significantly increase 
the Federal caseload and thus would not have any significant 
impact on the federal budget.
    Section 211 would require judges, before sealing the files 
on certain civil cases, to determine if restricting access to 
court documents would affect public health or safety. The 
impact of this provision on caseload is highly uncertain. Based 
on information from the AOUSC, CBO expects that enacting this 
provision could increase the number of cases that are settled 
prior to filing in court. Such settlements would prevent the 
possibility that the details of an adverse finding on behalf of 
a defendant would become available to the public. On the other 
hand, CBO anticipates that under certain circumstances the 
number of appeals could increase as defendants attempt to 
restore their reputations after receiving adverse rulings that 
are made public. On balance, CBO concludes that the net impact 
of enacting this provision is likely to be small.
    CBO estimates that the other changes that would affect 
judicial process contained in this title would have no 
significant budgetary impact.

Title III

    Section 305 would give certain Federal judges the authority 
to carry firearms. Based on information from the AOUSC, CBO 
does not expect that a significant number of judges would opt 
to carry firearms. Furthermore, a firearms training program is 
in operation and surplus firearms from other agencies would be 
available for use by the judges. Thus, CBO estimates that 
enacting this provision would not have a significant budgetary 
effect.
    Section 308 would require the courts, subject to the 
availability of appropriated funds, to provide sign-language 
interpreters as necessary during any type of judicial 
proceeding. Under current law, such services are provided in 
some cases. Based on information from the AOUSC, CBO estimates 
that it would cost the courts about $40,000 annually to provide 
court interpreters in additional cases.
    Section 309 would amend the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 
1992 (Public Law 102-361), which created 10 temporary judgeship 
positions and required that the next vacancy in each of the 10 
affected district courts occurring five years after the 
effective date of the act (August 26, 1992) not be filled. 
Enacting section 309 would change the controlling date for 
leaving vacancies unfilled to five years after the confirmation 
date of the temporary judge, rather than five years after the 
effective date of the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 1992. Based 
on information from the AOUSC, CBO estimates that over the next 
five years about two more workyears for judges would be 
incurred under the bill than under current law. We estimate 
that enacting section 309 would result in about $1 million in 
new mandatory spending from fiscal year 1999 through fiscal 
year 2002 for salaries and benefits of judges. Salaries and 
benefits for support personnel and other expenditures related 
to the judgeships, which would require an appropriation, are 
estimated to cost about $2 million over the same period.
    The other sections under this title would make various 
changes that would affect the salaries and benefits for 
judiciary personnel. However, based on information from the 
AOUSC, CBO does not estimate that any of those changes would 
affect a significant number of judicial personnel. Thus, CBO 
estimates that neither discretionary nor mandatory spending 
would significantly increase by enacting these sections.

Title IV

    Two of the four sections under this title would increase 
offsetting collections and the spending of such receipts. 
First, section 401 would increase the filing fee for filing a 
civil action in district court from $120 to $150. Also, this 
section would increase the portion of this fee that would be 
deposited into the special judiciary fund in the Treasury to be 
used to finance activities of the AOUSC. Currently, this fund 
retains $60 of the $120 fee and enacting this section would 
require that an additional $30 (that is, $90 of the $150 fee) 
be deposited into this fund. According to the AOUSC, filing 
fees are eventually paid either at time of filing or at 
conclusion of a case in about 220,000 civil actions each year. 
Thus, CBO estimates that enacting this section would increase 
offsetting collections by about $7 million each year, beginning 
in 1997.
    Next, section 404 would allow the judiciary to retain 
revenue from future increases in fees paid for attorneys' 
admission to the Federal district bar, duplicate admission 
certificates, certificates of good standing, and filing an 
adversary complaint in bankruptcy cases. CBO expects that the 
Judicial Conference of the United States would increase such 
fees following enactment of this bill. We estimate the increase 
would generate about $3 million in offsetting collections each 
year. Because these collections as well as the amounts 
collected under section 401 would be spent without 
appropriations action, CBO estimates that enacting these 
provisions would have no net impact on the federal budget.

Title V

    Section 503 under this title would repeal a provision that 
bars annual cost-of-living adjustments in pay for judges except 
as specifically authorized by the Congress. CBO estimates that 
enacting this section would have no impact on the federal 
budget (relative to the budget resolution baseline) because the 
baseline already assumes cost-of-living pay raises for judges.
    The other provisions under this title would make minor 
changes to court procedures and we estimate that enacting them 
would not result in any cost to the government.

Title VI

    Section 605 under this title would abolish the Special 
Court that was established under the Regional Rail 
Reorganization Act of 1973 to oversee the reorganization of 
insolvent railroads. The court's current proceedings, which 
consist of less than 10 cases, and any future cases would be 
transferred to the district court for the District of Columbia. 
Based on information from the AOUSC, CBO estimates that 
eliminating this court would result in annual cost savings of 
about $200,000, assuming that appropriations were reduced 
accordingly.
    Section 609 would extend the authorization for 
appropriations from fiscal year 1997 to 1998 for the use of 
arbitration by certain district courts. Based on historical 
expenditures for the arbitration program, CBO estimates that 
the district courts would require an appropriation of this 
purpose of about $500,000 in fiscal year 1998.
    7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets 
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct 
spending or receipts through 1998. The various fee increases 
under Title IV would affect direct spending. However, because 
these fees, which are recorded as offsetting collections, would 
be mostly spend in the same year in which they are collected, 
CBO estimates that enacting the fee provisions would have no 
significant net impact on direct spending in each year. Because 
additional mandatory spending for the salaries and benefits for 
bankruptcy judges would not begin until fiscal year 1999, these 
amounts would not affect pay-as-you-go scoring.

                [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            1996       1997       1998  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in outlays......................          0          0          0
Change in receipts.....................      (\1\)      (\1\)      (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Not applicable.                                                       

    8. Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal 
governments: Intergovernmental Mandates. S. 1887 contains 
several intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). CBO estimates 
that the aggregate net cost of these mandates for state, local 
and tribal governments would total, at most, $1 million 
annually--well below the $50 million threshold established in 
Public Law 104-4.
    Preemption of certain state and local gun laws. The bill 
would preempt some state and local laws by authorizing federal 
pretrial and probation officers and certain federal judges to 
carry guns. According to information from the AOUSC, nine 
states prohibit judges and other non-exempt citizens from 
carrying concealed weapons and at least one state prohibits the 
same for pretrial officers. In addition, many of these 
officials who must travel across state and municipal borders 
find that their existing state authorization is not always 
legal in bordering areas. (Generally there is a residency 
requirement to obtain a permit to carry a gun in an area). The 
regulations implementing these provisions would also preclude 
the need for these federal officials to obtain permits or 
licenses from state and local governments.
    Currently, federal pretrial and probation officers pay less 
than $2,000 a year in gun permit fees to three states. Based on 
information from the AOUSC and firearm associations, CBO 
estimates that less than half of the approximately 2,000 
federal judges affected by the provision have gun permits, for 
which they pay less than $25,000 annually to state and local 
governments in permit fees. Reductions in fee revenues would be 
slightly offset by savings in administrative costs. CBO 
concludes that providing these officials federal authorization 
to carry guns would result in a net loss of revenues for state 
and local governments totaling less than $25,000 per year.
    Increase in civil action filing fees. The bill would 
increase the fee that parties, including state, local, and 
tribal governments, must pay to file civil actions in U.S. 
district courts. S. 1887 would raise the fee to $150 per filing 
(an increase of $30). According to the AOUSC, only a fraction 
of the 220,000 such cases filed annually are filed by state, 
local, or tribal governments. CBO estimates the costs to these 
governments of paying the increased fees would be less than $1 
million per year.
    Elimination of ability to collect attorney fees and 
injunctive relief in certain cases. The bill would prohibit 
prevailing parties, including state, local, and tribal 
governments, from collecting attorney fees and other costs and 
from obtaining injunctive relief in certain cases brought 
against judicial officers. However, very few of these types of 
cases are decided in favor of the plaintiff each year. 
Therefore, CBO estimates that any losses for state, local, and 
tribal governments in the form of forgone compensation would be 
negligible.
    Other Impacts on State, Local and Tribal Governments. A 
number of other provisions in S. 1887 would result in some 
costs to state, local, and tribal governments. These costs, 
however, would not result from mandates as defined in Public 
Law 104-4.
    First, the bill would require parties, including state, 
local, and tribal governments, who seek to restrict access to 
records in a civil case to provide additional information to 
the court. Second, by raising the threshold value that 
establishes the access of certain cases to U.S. district 
courts, the bill would add 3,000-6,000 civil cases a year to 
the dockets of state courts. CBO estimates that these provision 
would have an insignificant impact on the budgets of state, 
local and tribal governments.
    S. 1887 would also authorize the appropriation of $12.5 
million to the State Justice Institute (SJI) for each of fiscal 
years 1997-2000--exactily half the amount authorized under 
current law in each of the previous two fiscal years. SJI's 
fiscal year 1996 appropriation, however, was only $5 million. A 
quasi-governmental entity established by federal law, SJI's 
mission is to improve judicial administration in state courts 
through, among other activities, grants to state and local 
governments. The bill would amend the prioritization in making 
awards, giving state and local courts priority over other 
organizations in receiving grants and other assistance from 
SJI.
    9. Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 1887 would 
impose new private-sector mandates as defined in Public Law 
104-4. First, section 311 would prohibit prevailing parties in 
certain cases brought against judicial officers from collecting 
attorney's fees and other costs, and from obtaining injunctive 
relief. Second, section 401 would increase the filing fee that 
parties who institute civil actions in federal district courts 
are required to pay. That fee would be increased to $150 from 
its current law amount of $120. Third, section 402 would 
authorize the Director of the AOUSC to develop a performance-
based system of certification for court interpreters, and to 
charge fees to interpreters for purposes of obtaining 
certification.
    CBO estimates that the direct costs associated with new 
private-sector mandates in the bill would fall well-below the 
$100 million threshold specified in Public Law 104-4. 
Increasing the civil action filing fee would result in 
additional payments by the private sector of about $7 million 
per year. While the prohibition on cost recovery and injunctive 
relief in certain cases brought against judicial officers could 
impose substantial costs on private-sector parties in specific 
cases, the aggregate costs imposed on the private sector by 
this prohibition would be insignificant because very few cases 
of this type are decided in favor of the plaintiff each year. 
Lastly, authorizing the AOUSC Director to develop a 
certification system for court interpreters and to charge 
testing fees would essentially codifying existing practices. 
Thus, the direct cost of section 402 would be zero.
    10. Previous CBO estimate: On May 13, 1996, CBO transmitted 
a cost estimate for S. 1474, a bill to provide new authority 
for probation and pretrial services officers and for other 
purposes, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on the 
Judiciary on May 2, 1996. Section 101 of this bill is identical 
to S. 1474. The other provisions of S. 1887, as approved by the 
Senate Committee on the Judiciary, were not included in S. 
1474.
    11. Estimate prepared by: Federal Cost Estimate: Susanne S. 
Mehlman; State and Local Government Impact: Karen McVey; and 
Private Sector Impact: Matthew Eyles.
    12. Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, for Paul N. 
Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
                 VII. ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF MR. GRASSLEY

    The so-called Sunshine in Litigation Act, offered by 
Senator Kohl and narrowly adopted by the Committee, rests on 
the flawed premise that protective orders issued under rule 26 
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure restrict consumer 
access to information about dangerous and defective products. 
This contention presumes that information about defective 
products obtained through discovery cannot be obtained by 
consumers from other sources. However, the proponents of this 
legislation cannot point to any reliable study indicating that 
protective orders are the only source of information regarding 
defective products. In this information-saturated era, with the 
Internet accessible to consumers and networks of plaintiff 
attorneys trading information, it is not reasonable to believe 
that consumers are making ill-informed choices because of 
protective orders. When similar legislation was considered in 
the 103d Congress, the Committee received testimony from Prof 
Arthur Miller of the Harvard Law School, as well as from 
representatives from industry and well-respected Federal judges 
that information regarding defective products is available from 
a variety of sources. As there is no evidence suggesting that 
information about defective products contained in protective 
orders is not available from other sources, protective orders 
cannot be described as causing harm to consumers.
    The amendment requires Federal judges to make specific 
determinations that an order issued under rule 26 will not 
restrict the disclosure of information ``which is relevant to 
public health or safety'' prior to issuing such an order. This 
will obviously require judges to hold more hearings and will 
require litigants to spend more money attempting to comply with 
the amendment. Importantly, the phrase ``public health or 
safety'' is never defined. This will open the door to 
senseless, and potentially vexatious, litigation as judges and 
litigants attempt to discover the parameters of this vague 
requirement. If interpreted liberally, ``relevant to public 
health and safety'' could encompass virtually anything related 
to public health or safety no matter how attenuated or weak the 
relationship between the information and some potential harm. 
This makes for poor public policy, and the Congress ought not 
to open such a Pandora's box.
    Significantly, the balancing of interests which the 
Sunshine in Litigation Act seeks to create already exists in 
large measure. To prevent harm to the public, Federal courts 
routinely refuse to issue protective orders, or set protective 
orders aside., See., e.g., Pansy v. Borough of Stroudsburg, 23 
F.3d 772 (3d Cir. 1994); Leucadia, Inc. v. Applied Extrusion 
Technologies, 998 F.2d 157 (3d Cir. 1993); S.E.C. v. Van 
Waeyenberghe, 990 F.2d 845 (5th Cir. 1993); Pocono Artesian 
Waters v. Leffler Systems, 1194 U.S. Dist. Lexis 138 (E.D. Pa. 
1994). To the extent that protective orders can pose a risk to 
consumers, this concern can be, and is being, addressed 
appropriately under existing law. In short, the Sunshine in 
Litigation Act purports to cure a problem with Federal law 
which does not exist.
    Finally, Senator Kohl's amendment may have a deleterious 
effect on civil litigation. Under the liberal discovery rules 
in Federal court, parties to litigation can obtain highly 
sensitive information such as trade secrets or medical and 
psychiatric records. Since the phrase `'public health or 
safety'' used in the Sunshine in Litigation Act is vague on its 
face and is undefined in the amendment, litigants may face the 
unfair prospect of turning over sensitive, secret information 
with no assurance that such information will be held in 
confidence. This, in turn, creates a disincentive for litigants 
to cooperate in discovery and would give one side in litigation 
an opportunity to use confidential information as leverage to 
coerce the other side into a settlement. And lack of 
cooperation means that the workload of the Federal judiciary 
will increase as judges become involved in more discovery 
disputes which will slow the process of resolving lawsuits.
    In conclusion, the Sunshine in Litigation Act is 
unnecessary, expensive and will negatively affect the ability 
of Federal courts to dispense justice expeditiously. There is 
no evidence, other than flawed anecdotes, that protective 
orders issued under rule 26 have caused harm to consumers. 
Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham, the Chairman of the Judicial 
Conference's Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, testified on 
April 20, 1994, that, while there is no evidence that 
protective orders have caused harm to consumers, there is every 
reason to believe that requiring particularized factual 
determinations of the sort contained in Senator Kohl's 
amendment will make discovery in civil trials more difficult 
and time-consuming. Thus, the benefits of Senator Kohl's 
amendment are highly speculative at best while the negative 
consequences (slower and more expensive discovery, new 
litigation to define vague terms, the threat of the damaging 
disclosure of private information) would be substantial. Rather 
than imposing costly new burdens on Federal courts in an effort 
to protect consumers, it would be better to ensure that 
consumers have better access to product information so that 
they can make informed choices.

                                                    Chuck Grassley.
                   VIII. ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF MR. KOHL

    At the markup, we added a new section to the Federal Courts 
Improvements Act that addresses the growing abuse of secrecy 
orders issued by courts. All too often, our courts have allowed 
vital information that is discovered in litigation--and which 
directly bears on public health and safety--to be covered up: 
to be shielded from families whose lives are potentially at 
stake, and from the public officials we have appointed to 
protect our health and safety.
    All this happens because of the use of so-called protective 
orders--really ``gag'' orders issued by courts--that are 
designed to keep information discovered in the course of 
litigation secret and undisclosed. Typically, injured victims 
agree to a defendant's request to keep lawsuit information 
secret. They agree because defendants threaten that, without 
secrecy, they will refuse to pay a settlement. Victims cannot 
afford to take such chances. And while courts in these 
situations actually have the legal authority to deny requests 
for secrecy, typically they do not--because both sides have 
agreed, and judges have other matters they prefer to attend to.
    This provision will bring crucial information out of the 
darkness and into the light. It requires that judges weigh the 
impact on public health and safety before approving these 
secrecy orders. It is simple, effective, and straightforward. 
The provisions codifies what is already the practice of the 
best judges. In cases that do not affect public health safety, 
existing practice would continue, and courts could still issue 
protective orders as they do today. But in cases affecting 
public health and safety courts would apply a balancing test: 
they could permit secrecy only if the need for privacy 
outweighs the pubic's need to know about potential health or 
safety hazards. Moreover, courts could not, under this 
amendment, issue protective orders that would prevent 
disclosures to regulatory agencies.
    The problem of excessive secrecy orders in cases involving 
public health and safety has been apparent to the Committee for 
many years. The Committee first held hearings on this issue in 
1990. ``Court Secrecy,'' Hearings before the Subcommittee on 
Courts and Administrative Practice, Committee on the Judiciary 
(May 17, 1990), 101st Cong., 2d sess. We held hearings again in 
1994. ``The Sunshine in Litigation Act,'' hearings before the 
Subcommittee, on Courts and Administrative Practice, Committee 
on the Judiciary (Apr. 20, 1994), 103d Cong., 2d sess.
    In 1990, Arthur Bryant, the executive director of Trial 
Lawyers for Public Justice, told us: ``The one thing we learned 
* * * is that this problem is far more egregious than we ever 
imagined. It goes the length and depth of this country, and the 
frank truth is that much of civil litigation in this country is 
taking place in secret.'' 1990 hearings at 55. Four years 
later, attorney Gerry Spence told us about 19 cases he had been 
involved in which his clients had to sign secrecy agreements. 
They included cases involving defects in a hormonal pregnancy 
test that caused severe birth defects, a defective braking 
system of a steam roller, and an improperly manufactured tire 
rim. 1994 hearings at 43.
    Individual examples of this problem abound. For over a 
decade, Miracle Recreation, a U.S. playground equipment 
company, marketed a merry-go-round that caused serious injuries 
to scores of small children--including severed fingers and 
feet. Lawsuits brought against the manufacturer were 
confidentially settled, preventing the public and the Consumer 
Products Safety Commission from learning about the hazard. It 
took more than a decade for regulators to discover the hazard 
and for the company to recall the merry-go-round.
    There are yet more cases like these. In 1973, GM began 
marketing vehicles with dangerously placed fuel tanks that 
tended to rupture, burn, and explode on impact more frequently 
than regular tanks. Soon after these vehicles hit the American 
road, tragic accidents began occurring, and lawsuits were 
filed. More than 150 lawsuits were settled confidentially by 
GM. For years, this secrecy prevented the public from learning 
of the alleged dangers of these vehicles (6 million of which 
are still on the road). It wasn't until a trial in 1993 that 
the public began learning of the alleged dangers of GM 
sidesaddle gas tanks and the GM crash test data which appeared 
to demonstrate these dangers.
    Another case involves Fred Barbee, a Wisconsin resident 
whose wife, Carol, died because of a defective heart valve. We 
learned in the 1990 Judiciary Committee hearing from Mr. Barbee 
that in the months and years before his wife died, the valve 
manufacturer had quietly, without public knowledge, settled 
dozens of lawsuits in which the valve's defects were 
demonstrated. So when Mrs. Barbee's valve malfunctioned, she 
rushed to a health clinic in Spooner, WI, thinking, as did her 
doctors, that she was suffering from a heart attack. Ignorant 
of the evidence that her valve was defective, Mrs. Barbee was 
misdiagnosed. Mrs. Barbee was treated incorrectly and died. To 
this day, Mr. Barbee believes that but for the secret 
settlement of heart valve lawsuits, the medical community would 
have been aware of the valve defect, and his wife would be 
alive today. (1990 hearings at 5-8.)
    At the 1994 hearing, we heard from a family which we must 
call the ``Does'' because they are under a secrecy order and 
were afraid to use their own names when talking to us and to 
our committee. The Does were the victims of tragic medical 
malpractice that resulted in serious brain damage to their 
child. A friend of the Does is using the same doctor, but Mrs. 
Doe is terrified of saying anything to her friend for fear of 
violating the secrecy order that governed her lawsuit 
settlement. Mrs. Doe is afraid that if she talks, the defendant 
in her case will suspend the ongoing settlement payments that 
allow her to care for her injured child. (1994 hearings at 6-
7.)
    What sort of court system prohibits a woman from telling 
her friend that her child might be in danger? And the more 
disturbing question is this: what other secrets are currently 
held under lock and key which could be saving lives if they 
were made public?
    Having said all this, we must in fairness recognize that 
there is another side to this problem. Privacy is a cherished 
possession, and business information is an important commodity. 
For this reason, the courts must, in some cases, keep trade 
secrets and other business information confidential. The goal 
of this provision is to ensure that courts do not carelessly 
and automatically sanction secrecy when the health and safety 
of the American public is at stake. At the same time, it will 
still allow defendants to obtain secrecy orders when the need 
for privacy is significant and substantial.
    To attack the problem of excessive court secrecy is not to 
attack the business community. Most of the time, businesses 
seek protective orders for legitimate reasons. And although a 
few opponents of product liability reform may dispute that 
businesses care about public health and safety, we know that 
they do. Business people want to know about dangerous and 
defective products, and they want regulatory agencies to have 
the information necessary to protect the public.
    Those opposed to this provision argue that it make 
discovery more difficult, will decrease settlements and impose 
excessive burdens on judges. These problems are greatly 
exaggerated and do not take several points into account.
    First, this provision does not have any effect on most 
court cases, which have nothing to do with public health and 
safety. This amendment only applies to Federal courts and, 
within the Federal courts, to a small category of cases 
affecting public health and safety. In most cases, these issues 
will not be raised, and courts will not be burdened at all. A 
Judicial Conference study on the matter noted that only 5 to 10 
percent of all cases filed in Federal court involve protective 
orders. Of those, only about 10 to 20 percent involved personal 
injury. Based on these numbers, it is fair to say that only a 
small portion of all cases in Federal courts will require close 
scrutiny from judges.
    Second, this amendment does not prohibit confidentiality: 
it allows for secrecy in cases affecting public health and 
safety where the need for it is substantial. Moreover, it does 
not require that every document produced as a result of the 
litigation be made public. Not all of the litigation documents 
directly involve health and safety--and those documents can 
still be sealed.
    Third, a little extra work from judges seems a tiny price 
to pay for protecting blameless people from dangers. Every day, 
in the course of litigation, judges make tough calls about how 
to construe the public interest and other laws that Congress 
passes. We are confident that the courts will administer this 
law fairly and sensibly. After all, under the current version 
of rule 26(c) courts are required to determine whether there is 
``good cause'' to enter a protective order. If judges can 
determine what is good cause, they can determine what 
constitutes ``public health and safety.'' If this requires 
extra work, then the work is well worth it. After all, no one 
argues that spoiled meat should be let out on the market 
because stricter regulations mean more work for FDA meat 
inspectors.
    Finally, some may argue civil disputes are fundamentally 
private. The civil judicial system, according to this view, is 
an exclusive, private system--devoid of public interest 
considerations. But this view ignores the fact that the courts 
are fundamentally public institutions, funded by hundreds of 
millions of tax dollars. A protective order issued by a Federal 
judge is an exertion of governmental power. That power should 
not be at the disposal of private parties at their whim. Public 
institutions cannot afford cannot afford to ignore the public 
interest in dispensing justice.
    Abner Mikva, then chief judge of the Federal Circuit Court 
of Appeals for the District of Columbia, testified in our 1994 
hearing that ``I side with Chairman Kohl in believing that 
there is an excess of court secrecy in civil litigation, and 
that it presents a serious problem for the health and safety of 
our population. That problem is to important to leave to the 
rule changers.''
    The Committee would be satisfied to see this issue 
addressed by judges themselves. But since we first held hearing 
on court secrecy in 1990, the judges have remained essentially 
inert.\1\ Indeed, before the Committee voted on this provision, 
we received a letter from the Judicial Conference telling us 
that it was continuing its study of this issue. The letter 
ironically noted ironically noted that ``the task will be a 
long one.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ In fact, last year we worked with a number of Federal judges to 
prevent rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, dealing with 
protective orders, from becoming even worse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unfortunately, we need to deal with this problem sooner 
rather than later. That is why I am pleased that a substantial 
majority of the Committee supported my amendment.

                                                         Herb Kohl.
                      IX. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
S. 1887, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in brackets, new matter is 
printed in italic, and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

                           UNITED STATES CODE

          * * * * * * *

                TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

          * * * * * * *

    CHAPTER 207--RELEASE AND DETENTION PENDING JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 3154. Functions and powers relating to pretrial services

    Pretrial services functions shall include the following:
          (1) Collect, verify, and * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (12)(A) As directed by the court and to the degree 
        required by the regimen of care or treatment ordered by 
        the court as a condition of release, keep informed as 
        to the conduct and provide supervision of a person 
        conditionally released under the provisions of section 
        4243 or 4246 of this title, and report such person's 
        conduct and condition to the court ordering release and 
        the Attorney General or his designee.
          (B) Any violation of the conditions of release shall 
        immediately be reported to the court and the Attorney 
        General or his designee.
          (13) If approved by the district court, be authorized 
        to carry firearms under such rules and regulations as 
        the Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
        States Courts may prescribe.
          [(13)] Perform such other functions as specified 
        under this chapter.
          (14)
          * * * * * * *

            CHAPTER 219--TRIAL BY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATES

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 3401. Misdemeanors; application of probation laws

    (a) When specially designated to exercise such jurisdiction 
by the district court or courts he serves, any United States 
magistrate shall have jurisdiction to try persons accused of, 
and sentence persons convicted of, misdemeanors committed 
within that judicial district.
    (b) Any person charged with a misdemeanor, other than a 
petty offense, may elect, however, to be tried before a judge 
of the district court for the district in which the offense was 
committed. The magistrate shall carefully explain to the 
defendant that he has a right to trial, judgment, and 
sentencing by a judge of the district court and that he may 
have a right to trial by jury before a district judge or 
magistrate. [The magistrate shall not proceed to try the case 
unless the defendant, after such explanation, files a written 
consent to be tried before the magistrate that specifically 
waives trial, judgment, and sentencing by a judge of the 
district court.] The magistrate judge may not proceed to try 
the case unless the defendant, after such explanation, 
expressly consents to be tried before the magistrate judge and 
expressly and specifically waives trial, judgment, and 
sentencing by a district judge. Any such consent and waiver 
shall be made in writing or orally on the record.
          * * * * * * *
    (g) [The magistrate may, in a Class B or C misdemeanor 
case, or infraction case involving a juvenile in which consent 
to trail before a magistrate has been filed under subsection 
(b) of this section, exercise all powers granted to the 
district court under chapter 403 of this title.] The magistrate 
judge may, in a petty offense case involving a juvenile, 
exercise all powers granted to the district court under chapter 
403 of this title. For purposes of this subsection, proceedings 
under chapter 403 of this title may be instituted against a 
juvenile by a violation notice or complaint, except that no 
such case may proceed unless the certification referred to in 
section 5032 of this title has been filed in open court at the 
arraignment. No term of imprisonment shall be imposed by the 
magistrate in any such case.
          * * * * * * *

                CHAPTER 229--POSTSENTENCE ADMINISTRATION

                        Subchapter A--Probation

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 3603. Duties of probation officers

    A probation officer shall--
          (1) instruct a probationer or a person on supervised 
        release, who is under his supervision, as to the 
        conditions specified by the sentencing court, and 
        provide him with a written statement clearly setting 
        forth all such conditions;
          * * * * * * *
          (8)(A) when directed by the court, and to the degree 
        required by the regimen of care or treatment ordered by 
        the court as a condition of release, keep informed as 
        to the conduct and provide supervision of a person 
        conditionally released under the provisions of section 
        4243 or 4246 of this title, and report such person's 
        conduct and condition to the court ordering release and 
        to the Attorney General or his designee; and
          (B) immediately report any violation of the 
        conditions of release to the court and the Attorney 
        General or his designee; [and]
          (9) if approved by the district court, be authorized 
        to carry firearms under such rules and regulations as 
        the Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
        States Courts may prescribe; and[9](10) perform any 
        other duty that the court may designate.
          * * * * * * *

               TITLE 28--JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE

                     PART I--ORGANIZATION OF COURTS

          * * * * * * *

                       CHAPTER 5--DISTRICT COURTS

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 125. Utah

    Utah constitutes one judicial district comprising two 
divisions.
          (1) The Northern Division comprises the counties of 
        Box Elder, Cache, Davis, Morgan, Rich, and Weber.
          Court for the Northern Division shall be held at Salt 
        Lake City and Ogden.
          (2) The Central Division comprises the counties of 
        Beaver, Carbon, Daggett, Duchesne, Emery, Garfield, 
        Grand, Iron, Juab, Kane, Millard, Piute, Salt Lake, San 
        Juan, Sanpete, Sevier, Summit, Tooele, Uintah, Utah, 
        Wasatch, Washington, and Wayne.
          Court for the Central Division shall be held at Salt 
        Lake City, Provo, and St. George.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 134. Tenure and residence of district judges

    (a) The district judges shall hold office during good 
behavior.
    (b) Each district judge, except in the District of 
Columbia, the Southern District of New York, and the Eastern 
District of New York, shall reside in the district or one of 
the districts for which he is appointed. Each district judge of 
the Southern District of New York and the Eastern district of 
New York may reside within 20 miles of the district to which he 
or she is appointed.
          * * * * * * *

                      CHAPTER 6--BANKRUPTCY JUDGES

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 157. Procedures

    (a) Each district court may provide that any or all cases 
under title 11 and any or all proceedings arising under title 
11 or arising in or related to a case under title 11 shall be 
referred to the bankruptcy judges for the district.
          * * * * * * *
    [(c)(1) A bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that is 
not a core proceeding but that is otherwise related to a case 
under title 11. In such proceeding, the bankruptcy judge shall 
submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the 
district court, and any final order or judgment shall be 
entered by the district judge after considering the bankruptcy 
judge's proposed findings and conclusions and after reviewing 
de novo those matters to which any party has timely and 
specifically objected.]
    (c)(1) A bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that is not 
a core proceeding but that is otherwise related to a case under 
title 11. In such proceeding, the bankruptcy judge shall submit 
proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the 
district court, and any final order or judgment shall be 
entered by the district judge after considering the bankruptcy 
judge's proposed findings and conclusions and after reviewing 
de novo those matters to which any party has timely and 
specifically objected. A party shall be deemed to consent to 
the findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by a 
bankruptcy judge unless the party files a timely objection. If 
a timely objection is not filed, the proposed findings of fact 
and conclusions of law submitted by the bankruptcy judge shall 
become final and the bankruptcy judge shall enter an 
appropriate order thereon.
          * * * * * * *

                CHAPTER 11--COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE

Sec.
251. Appointment and number of judges; offices.
252. Tenure and salaries of judges.
[253. Duties of chief judge; precedence of judges.]
253. Duties of chief judge.
254. Single-judge trial.
255. Three-judge trials.
256. Trials at ports other than New York.
257. Publication of decisions.
258. Chief judges; precedence of judges.

Sec. 251. Appointment and number of judges; offices

    (a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, nine judges who shall constitute a court 
of record to be known as the United States Court of 
International Trade. Not more than five of such judges shall be 
from the same political party. The court is a court established 
under article III of the Constitution of the United States.
    [(b) The President shall designate one of the judges of the 
Court of International Trade who is less than seventy years of 
age to serve as chief judge. The chief judge shall continue to 
serve as chief judge until he reaches the age of seventy years 
and another judge is designated as chief judge by the 
President. After the designation of another judge to serve as 
chief judge, the former chief judge may continue to serve as a 
judge of the court.]
    [(c)] (b) The offices of the Court of International Trade 
shall be located in New York, New York.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 253. Duties of chief judge; precedence of judges]

Sec. 253. Duties of chief judge

    (a) The chief judge of the Court of International Trade, 
with the approval of the court, shall supervise the fiscal 
affairs and clerical force of the court;
    (b) The chief judge shall promulgate dockets.
    (c) The chief judge, under rules of the court, may 
designate any judge or judges of the court to try any case and, 
when the circumstances so warrant, reassign the case to another 
judge or judges.
    [(d) Whenever the chief judge is unable to perform the 
duties of his office or the office is vacant, his powers and 
duties shall devolve upon the judge next in precedence who is 
able to act, until such disability is removed or another chief 
judge is appointed and duly qualified.
    [(e) The chief judge shall have precedence and shall 
preside at any session which he attends. Other judges shall 
have precedence and shall preside according to the seniority of 
their commissions. Judges whose commissions bear the same date 
shall have precedence according to seniority in age.]
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 257. Publication of decisions

    All decisions of the Court of International Trade shall be 
preserved and open to inspection.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 258. Chief judges; precedence of judges

    (a)(1) The chief judge of the Court of International Trade 
shall be the judge of the court in regular active service who 
is senior in commission of those judges who--
          (A) are 64 years of age or under;
          (B) have served for 1 year or more as a judge of the 
        court; and
          (C) have not served previously as chief judge.
    (2)(A) In any case in which no judge of the court meets the 
qualifications under paragraph (1), the youngest judge in 
regular active service who is 65 years of age or over and who 
has served as a judge of the court for 1 year or more shall act 
as the chief judge.
    (B) In any case under subparagraph (A) in which there is no 
judge of the court in regular active service who has served as 
a judge of the court for 1 year or more, the judge of the court 
in regular active service who is senior in commission and who 
has not served previously as chief judge shall act as the chief 
judge.
    (3)(A) Except as provided under subparagraph (C), the chief 
judge serving under paragraph (1) shall serve for a term of 7 
years and shall serve after expiration of such term until 
another judge is eligible under paragraph (1) to serve as chief 
judge.
    (B) Except as provided under subparagraph (C), a judge of 
the court acting as chief judge under subparagraph (A) or (B) 
of paragraph (2) shall serve until a judge meets the 
qualifications under paragraph (1).
    (C) No judge of the court may serve or act as chief judge 
of the court after attaining the age of 70 years unless no 
other judge is qualified to serve as chief judge under 
paragraph (1) or is qualified to act as chief judge under 
paragraph (2).
    (b) The chief judge shall have precedence and preside at 
any session of the court which such judge attends. Other judges 
of the court shall have precedence and preside according to the 
seniority of their commissions. Judges whose commissions bear 
the same date shall have precedence according to seniority in 
age.
    (c) If the chief judge desires to be relieved of the duties 
as chief judge while retaining active status as a judge of the 
court, the chief judge may so certify to the Chief Justice of 
the United States, and thereafter the chief judge of the court 
shall be such other judge of the court who is qualified to 
serve or act as chief judge under subsection (a).
    (d) If a chief judge is temporarily unable to perform the 
duties as such, such duties shall be performed by the judge of 
the court in active service, able and qualified to act, who is 
next in precedence.
          * * * * * * *

             CHAPTER 15--CONFERENCES AND COUNCILS OF JUDGES

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 331. Judicial Conference of the United States

    The Chief Justice of the United States * * *
    [The district judge to be summoned from each judicial 
circuit shall be chosen by the circuit and district judges of 
the circuit at the annual judicial conference of the circuit 
held pursuant to section 333 of this title and shall serve as 
member of the conference for three successive years, except 
that in the year following the enactment of this amended 
section the judges in the first, fourth, seventh, and tenth 
circuits shall choose a district judge to serve for one year, 
the judges in the second, fifth, and eighth circuits shall 
choose a district judge to serve for two years and the judges 
in the third, sixth, ninth, and District of Columbia circuits 
shall choose a district judge to serve for three years.]
    The district judge to be summoned from each judicial 
circuit shall be chosen by the circuit and district judges of 
the circuit and shall serve as a member of the Judicial 
Conference of the United States for a term of not less than 3 
successive years nor more than 5 successive years, as 
established by majority vote of all circuit and district judges 
of the circuit. A district judge serving as a member of the 
Judicial Conference may be either a judge in regular active 
service or a judge retired from regular active service under 
section 371(b) of this title.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 332. Judicial councils of circuits

    (a)(1) The * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (f)(1) Each circuit executive shall be paid at a salary to 
be established by the Judicial Conference of the United States 
not to exceed the annual rate of level IV of the Executive 
Schedule pay rates under section 5315 of title 5.
          * * * * * * *
    (4) The circuit executive and his staff shall be deemed to 
be officers and employees of the judicial branch of the United 
States Government within the meaning of subchapter III of 
chapter 83 (relating to civil service retirement), chapter 87 
(relating to Federal employees' life insurance program), and 
chapter 89 (relating to Federal employees' health benefits 
program) of title 5, United States Code.
    (g) No later than January 31 of each year, each judicial 
council shall submit a report to the Administrative Office of 
the United States Courts on the number and nature of orders 
entered under this section during the preceding calendar year 
that relate to judicial misconduct or disability.
          * * * * * * *

     CHAPTER 17--RESIGNATION AND RETIREMENT OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 371. Retirement on salary; retirement in senior status

    (a) The * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (f)(1) In order to continue receiving the salary of the 
office under subsection (b), a justice must be certified in 
each calendar year by the Chief Justice, and a judge must be 
certified by the chief judge of the circuit in which the judge 
sits, as having met the requirements set forth in at least one 
of the following subparagraphs:
          * * * * * * *
          (D) The justice or judge has, in the preceding 
        calendar year, performed substantial administrative 
        duties directly related to the operation of the courts, 
        or has performed substantial duties for a Federal or 
        State governmental entity. A certification under this 
        subparagraph shall specify that the work done is equal 
        to the full-time work of an employee of the judicial 
        branch. In any year in which a justice or judge 
        performs work described under this subparagraph for 
        less than the full year, one-half of such work may be 
        aggregated with work described under subparagraph (A), 
        (B), or (C) of this paragraph for the purpose of the 
        justice or judge satisfying the requirements of such 
        subparagraph.
          * * * * * * *
    (3) If in any year a justice or judge who retires under 
subsection (b) does not receive a certification under this 
subsection (except as provided in paragraph (1)(E)), he or she 
[is thereafter ineligible to receive such a certification.] may 
thereafter receive a certification for that year by satisfying 
the requirements of subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of 
paragraph (1) of this subsection in a subsequent year and 
attributing a sufficient part of the work performed in such 
subsequent year to the earlier year so that the work so 
attributed, when added to the work performed during such 
earlier year, satisfies the requirements for certification for 
that year. However, a justice or judge may not receive credit 
for the same work for purposes of certification for more than 1 
year.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 376. Annuities for survivors of certain judicial officials of the 
                    United States

    (a) * * *
    [(b)(1) Every judicial official who files a written 
notification of his or her intention to come within the purview 
of this section, in accordance with paragraph (1) of subsection 
(a) of this section, shall be deemed thereby to consent and 
agree to having deducted and withheld from his or her salary, a 
sum equal to 2.2 percent of that salary, and a sum equal to 3.5 
percent of his or her retirement salary. The deduction from any 
retirement salary--
          [(A) of a justice or judge of the United States 
        retired from regular active service who is described in 
        section 371(b)(1) of this title,
          [(B) of a justice or judge of the United States 
        retired under section 372(a) of this title who is 
        willing and able to perform judicial duties in 
        accordance with section 294 of this title,
          [(C) of a judge of the United States Court of Federal 
        Claims retired under section 178(a) or (b) of this 
        title who meets the requirements of section 178(d) of 
        this title, or
          [(D) of a judicial official on recall under section 
        155(b), 797, 373(c)(4), 375, or 636(h) of this title,
shall be an amount equal to 2.2 percent of retirement salary.]
    (b)(1) Every judicial official who files a written 
notification of his or her intention to come within the purview 
of this section, in accordance with paragraph (1) of subsection 
(a) of this section, shall be deemed thereby to consent and 
agree to having deducted and withheld from his or her salary a 
sum equal to 2.2 percent of that salary, and a sum equal to 3.5 
percent of his or her retirement salary. The deduction from any 
retirement salary--
          (A) of a justice or judge of the United States 
        retired from regular active service under section 
        371(b) or section 372(a) of this title,
          (B) of a judge of the United States Court of Federal 
        Claims retired under section 178 of this title, or
          (C) of a judicial official on recall under section 
        155(b), 373(c)(4), 375, or 636(h) of this title,
shall be an amount equal to 2.2 percent of retirement salary.
          * * * * * * *
    (o)(1) In any case in which a judicial official dies while 
in office, [or while receiving ``retirement salary'',] while 
receiving retirement salary, or after filing an election and 
otherwise complying with the conditions under subsection (b)(2) 
of this section, and;
          (A) subject to paragraph (2) of this subsection, 
        before having completed eighteen months of civilian 
        service, computed in accordance with subsection (k) of 
        this section, during which the salary deductions 
        provided by subsection (b) of this section or the 
        deposit required by subsection (d) of this section have 
        actually been made; or
          * * * * * * *

     CHAPTER 21--GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO COURTS AND JUDGES

Sec.
451. Definitions.
     * * * * * * *
463. Expenses of litigation.
464. Carrying of firearms by judicial officers.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 463. Expenses of litigation

    Whenever a Chief Justice, justice, judge, officer, or 
employee of any United States court is sued in his official 
capacity, or is otherwise required to defend acts taken or 
omissions made in his official capacity, and the services of an 
attorney for the Government are not reasonably available 
pursuant to chapter 31 of this title, the Director of the 
Administrative Office of the United States Courts may pay the 
costs of his defense. The Director shall prescribe regulations 
for such payments subject to the approval of the Judicial 
Conference of the United States.

Sec. 464. Carrying of firearms by judicial officers

    (a) A judicial officer of the United States is authorized 
to carry firearms, whether concealed or not, under regulations 
promulgated by the Judicial Conference of the United States.
    (b)(1) The regulations promulgated by the Judicial 
Conference under subsection (a) shall--
          (A) require a demonstration of a judicial officer's 
        proficiency in the use and safety of firearms as a 
        prerequisite to the carrying of firearms under the 
        authority of this section; and
          (B) make appropriate provisions for the carrying of 
        firearms by judicial officers who are under the 
        protection of United States Marshals while away from 
        United States courthouses.
    (2) On the request of the Judicial Conference, the 
Department of Justice (including each agency of the Department) 
shall cooperate with the Judicial Conference in providing 
firearms training and other services to assist judicial 
officers in securing such proficiency.
    (c) For purposes of this section, the term ``judicial 
officer of the United States'' means--
          (1) a justice or judge of the United States as 
        defined in section 451 of this title in regular active 
        or retired from regular active service;
          (2) a justice or judge of the United States who has 
        retired from the judicial office under section 371(a) 
        of this title for--
                  (A) a 1-year period following such justice's 
                or judge's retirement; or
                  (B) a longer period of time if approved by 
                the Judicial Conference of the United States 
                when exceptional circumstances warrant;
          (3) a United States bankruptcy judge;
          (4) a full-time or part-time United States magistrate 
        judge;
          (5) a judge of the United States Court of Federal 
        Claims;
          (6) a judge of the United States District Court of 
        Guam;
          (7) a judge of the United States District Court for 
        the Northern Mariana Islands;
          (8) a judge of the United States District Court of 
        the Virgin Islands; or
          (9) an individual who is retired from one of the 
        judicial positions described under paragraphs (3) 
        through (8) to the extent provided for in regulations 
        of the Judicial Conference of the United States.
    (d) Notwithstanding section 46303(c)(1) of title 49, 
nothing in this section authorizes a judicial officer of the 
United States to carry a dangerous weapon on an aircraft or 
other common carrier.

                 PART III--COURT OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES

          * * * * * * *

       CHAPTER 41--ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF UNITED STATES COURTS

Sec.
601. Creation; Director and Deputy Director.
     * * * * * * *
611. Retirement of Director.
612. Judiciary Automation Fund.

Sec. 601. Creation; Director and Deputy Director

    The Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall 
be maintained at the seat of government. It shall be supervised 
by a Director and a Deputy Director appointed and subject to 
removal by the Chief Justice of the United States, after 
consulting with the Judicial Conference. The Director and 
Deputy Director shall be deemed to be officers for purposes of 
title 5, United States Code.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 611. Retirement of Director

    (a) * * *
    (b) Upon the retirement of a Director who has elected 
coverage under this section and [who has served at least 
fifteen years and] who has at least 15 years of service and has 
attained the age of sixty-five years the Administrative Office 
of the United States Courts shall pay him an annuity for life 
equal to 80 per centum of the salary of the office at the time 
of his retirement.
    Upon the retirement of a Director who has elected coverage 
under this section and [who has served at least ten years] who 
has at least 10 years of service, but who is not eligible to 
receive an annuity under the first paragraph of this 
subsection, the Administrative Office of the United States 
Courts shall pay him an annuity for life equal to that 
proportion of 80 per centum of the salary of the office at the 
time of his retirement that the number of years of his service 
bears to fifteen, reduced by one-quarter of 1 per centum for 
each full month, if any, he is under the age of sixty-five at 
the time of separation from service.
    (c) A Director who has elected coverage under this section 
and who becomes permanently disabled to perform the duties of 
his office shall be retired and shall receive an annuity for 
life equal to 80 per centum of the salary of the office at the 
time of his retirement if he has [served at least fifteen 
years,] at least 15 years of service, or equal to that 
proportion of 80 per centum of such salary that the aggregate 
number of years of his service bears to fifteen if he has 
[served less than fifteen years,] less than 15 years of 
service, but in no event less than 50 per centum of such 
salary.
    (d) For the purpose of this section, ``service'' means 
service, whether or not continuous, as Director of the 
Administrative Office of the United States Courts, and any 
service, not to exceed five years, as a judge of the United 
States, a Senator or Representative in Congress, a 
congressional employee in the capacity of primary 
administrative assistant to a Member of Congress or in the 
capacity of staff director or chief counsel for the majority or 
the minority of a committee or subcommittee of the Senate or 
House of Representatives, or a civilian official appointed by 
the President, by and with the advice and consent of the 
Senate.
    (e) Each annuity payable under this section shall be 
increased by the same percentage amount and effective on the 
same date as annuities payable under chapter 83 of title 5, are 
increased as provided by section 8340 of title 5.
          * * * * * * *

                  CHAPTER 42--FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 621. Board, composition, tenure of members, compensation

    (a) The activities of the Center shall be supervised by a 
Board to be composed of--
          (1) the Chief Justice of the United States, who shall 
        be the permanent Chairman of the Board;
          [(2) two active judges of the courts of appeals of 
        the United States, three active judges of the district 
        courts of the United States, one active judge of the 
        bankruptcy courts of the United States elected by vote 
        of the members of the Judicial Conference of the United 
        States: Provided, however, That the judges so elected 
        shall not be members of the Judicial Conference of the 
        United States; and]
          (2) two circuit judges, three district judges, one 
        bankruptcy judge, and one magistrate judge, elected by 
        vote of the members of the Judicial Conference of the 
        United States, except that any circuit or district 
        judge so elected may be either a judge in regular 
        active service or a judge retired from regular active 
        service under section 371(b) of this title but shall 
        not be a member of the Judicial Conference of the 
        United States; and
          (3) the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
        United States Courts, who shall be a permanent member 
        of the Board.
    (b) The term of office of each elected member of the Board 
shall be four years. A member elected to serve for an unexpired 
term arising by virtue of the death, disability, [retirement,] 
retirement pursuant to section 371(a) or section 372(a) of this 
title, or resignation of a member shall be elected only for 
such unexpired term.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 627. Retirement; employee benefits

    (a) A Director of the Federal Judicial Center who attains 
the age of seventy years shall be retired from that office.
    (b) The Director, Deputy Director, the professional staff, 
and the clerical and secretarial employees of the Federal 
Judicial Center shall be deemed to be officers and employees of 
the judicial branch of the United States Government within the 
meaning of subchapter III of chapter 83 (relating to civil 
service retirement), chapter 84 (relating to the Federal 
Employees' Retirement System), chapter 87 (relating to Federal 
employees' life insurance program), and chapter 89 (relating to 
Federal employees' health benefits program) of title 5, United 
States Code: Provided, however, That the Director, upon written 
notice filed with the Director of the Administrative Office of 
the United States Courts within 6 months after the date on 
which he takes office, may waive coverage under chapter 83 of 
title 5, subchapter III (the Civil Service Retirement System) 
or chapter 84 of title 5 (the Federal Employees' Retirement 
System), whichever is applicable, and elect coverage under the 
retirement and disability provisions of this section. A 
Director who elects coverage under this section shall be deemed 
an ``employee'' for purposes of chapter 84 of title 5, 
subchapter III, regardless of whether he has waived the 
coverage of chapter 83, subchapter III, or chapter 84: And 
provided further, That upon his nonretirement separation from 
the Federal Judicial center, waiver of coverage under chapter 
83, subchapter III, and election of this section shall not 
operate to foreclose to the Director such opportunity as the 
law may provide to secure retirement credit under chapter 83 
for service as Director by depositing with interest the amount 
required by section 8334 of title 5. A Director who waives 
coverage under chapter 84 and elects this section may secure 
retirement credit under chapter 84 for service as Director by 
depositing with interest 1.3 percent of basic pay for service 
from January 1, 1984, through December 31, 1986, and the amount 
referred to in section 8422(a) of title 5, for service after 
December 31, 1986. Interest shall be computed under section 
8334(e) of title 5.
    (c) Upon the retirement of a Director who has elected 
coverage under this section and [who has served at least 
fifteen years and] who has at least 15 years of service and has 
attained the age of sixty-five years the Director of the 
Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall pay him 
an annuity for life equal to 80 per centum of the salary of the 
office at the time of his retirement.
    Upon the retirement of a Director who has elected coverage 
under this section and [who has served at least ten years,] who 
has at least 10 years of service, but who is not eligible to 
receive an annuity under the first paragraph of this 
subsection, the Administrative Office of the United States 
Courts shall pay him an annuity for life equal to that 
proportion of 80 per centum of the salary of the office at the 
time of his retirement that the number of years of his service 
bears to fifteen, reduced by one-quarter of 1 per centum for 
each full month, if any, he is under the age of sixty-five at 
the time of separation from service.
    (d) A Director who has elected coverage under this section 
and who becomes permanently disabled to perform the duties of 
his office shall be retired and shall receive an annuity for 
life equal to 80 per centum of the salary of the office at the 
time of his retirement if he has [served at least fifteen 
years,] at least 15 years of service, or equal to that 
proportion of 80 per centum of such salary that the aggregate 
number of years of his service bears to fifteen if he has 
[served less than fifteen years,] less than 15 years of 
service, but in no event less than 50 per centum of such 
salary.
    (e) For the purpose of this section, ``service'' means 
service, whether or not continuous, as Director of the Federal 
Judicial Center, and any service, not to exceed five years, as 
a judge of the United States, a Senator or Representative in 
Congress, a congressional employee in the capacity of primary 
administrative assistant to a Member of Congress or in the 
capacity of staff director or chief counsel for the majority or 
the minority of a committee or subcommittee of the Senate or 
House of Representatives, or a civilian official appointed by 
the President, by and with the advice and consent of the 
Senate.
    (f) Each annuity payable under this section shall be 
increased by the same percentage amount and effective on the 
same date as annuities payable under chapter 83 of title 5, are 
increased as provided by section 8340 of title 5.

                 CHAPTER 43--UNITED STATES MAGISTRATES

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 636. Jurisdiction, powers, and temporary assignment

    (a) Each United States magistrate serving under this 
chapter shall have within the territorial jurisdiction 
prescribed by his appointment--
          (1) * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (3) the power to conduct trials under section 3401, 
        title 18, United States Code, in conformity with and 
        subject to the limitations of that section[, and];
          (4) the power to enter a sentence for a petty 
        offense; and
          [(4)] (5) the power to enter a sentence for a 
        misdemeanor [or infraction], other than a petty 
        offense, with the consent of the parties.
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary--
          (1) Upon * * *
          * * * * * * *
          (3) Upon entry of judgment in any case referred under 
        paragraph (1) of this subsection, an aggrieved party 
        may appeal directly to the appropriate United States 
        court of appeals from the judgment of the magistrate in 
        the same manner as an appeal from any other judgment of 
        a district court. [In this circumstance, the] The 
        consent of the parties allows a magistrate designated 
        to exercise civil jurisdiction under paragraph (1) of 
        this subsection to direct the entry of a judgment of 
        the district court in accordance with the Federal Rules 
        of Civil Procedure. Nothing in this paragraph shall be 
        construed as a limitation of any party's right to seek 
        review by the Supreme Court of the United States.
          [(4) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (3) 
        of this subsection, at the time of reference to a 
        magistrate, the parties may further consent to appeal 
        on the record to a judge of the district court in the 
        same manner as on an appeal from a judgment of the 
        district court to a court of appeals. Wherever possible 
        the local rules of the district court and the rules 
        promulgated by the conference shall endeavor to make 
        such appeal inexpensive. The district court may affirm, 
        reverse, modify, or remand the magistrate's's judgment.
          [(5) Cases in the district courts under paragraph 
        (4a) of this subsection may be reviewed by the 
        appropriate United States court of appeals upon 
        petition for leave to appeal by a party stating 
        specific objections to the judgment. Nothing in this 
        paragraph shall be construed to be a limitation on any 
        party's right to seek review by the Supreme Court of 
        the United States.]
          [(6)] (4) The court may, for good cause shown on its 
        own motion, or under extraordinary circumstances shown 
        by any party, vacate a reference of a civil matter to a 
        magistrate under this subsection.
          [(7)] (5) The magistrate shall, subject to guidelines 
        of the Judicial Conference, determine whether the 
        record taken pursuant to this section shall be taken by 
        electronic sound recording, by a court reporter, or by 
        other means.
    (d) The practice and procedure for the trial of cases 
before officers serving under this chapter[, and for the taking 
and hearing of appeals to the district courts,] shall conform 
to rules promulgated by the Supreme Court pursuant to section 
2072 of this title.
          * * * * * * *
    (f) In an emergency and upon the concurrence of the chief 
judges of the districts involved, and United States magistrate 
may be temporarily assigned to perform any of the duties 
specified in subsection [(a) or (b)] (a), (b), or (c) of this 
section in a judicial district other than the judicial district 
for which he has been appointed. No magistrate shall perform 
any of such duties in a district to which he has been 
temporarily assigned until an order has been issued by the 
chief judge of such district specifying (1) the emergency by 
reason of which he has been transferred, (2) the duration of 
his assignment, and (3) the duties which he is authorized to 
perform. A magistrate so assigned shall not be entitled to 
additional compensation but shall be reimbursed for actual and 
necessary expenses incurred in the performance of his duties in 
accordance with section 635.
          * * * * * * *

                      CHAPTER 49--DISTRICT COURTS

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 753. Reporters

    (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (e) Each reporter shall receive an annual salary to be 
fixed from time to time by the Judicial Conference of the 
United States. For the purpose of subchapter III of chapter 83 
of title 5 and chapter 84 of such title, a reporter shall be 
considered a full-time employee during any pay period for which 
a reporter receives a salary at the annual salary rate fixed 
for a full-time reporter under the preceding sentence. All 
supplies shall be furnished by the reporter at his own expense.
          * * * * * * *

    CHAPTER 57--GENERAL PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO COURT OFFICERS AND 
                               EMPLOYEES

Sec.
951. Oath of office of clerks and deputies.
[952. Repealed.]
953. Administration of oaths and acknowledgments.
[954. Death of clerk; duties of deputies.]
954. Vacancy in clerk position; absence of clerk.
     * * * * * * *
963. Courts defined.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 954. Death of clerk; duties of deputies

    [Upon the death of any clerk of court, his deputy or 
deputies shall execute the duties of the deceased clerk in his 
name until his successor is appointed and qualifies.
    [The compensation of a deceased clerk of the Supreme Court 
may be paid to his personal representatives until his successor 
is appointed and qualifies.]

Sec. 954. Vacancy in clerk position; absence of clerk

    When the office of clerk is vacant, the deputy clerks shall 
perform the duties of the clerk in the name of the last person 
who held that office. When the clerk is incapacitated, absent, 
or otherwise unavailable to perform official duties, the deputy 
clerks shall perform the duties of the clerk in the name of the 
clerk. The court may designate a deputy clerk to act 
temporarily as clerk of the court in his or her own name.
          * * * * * * *

                    PART IV--JURISDICTION AND VENUE

          * * * * * * *

               CHAPTER 85--DISTRICT COURTS; JURISDICTION

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1332. Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs.

    (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of 
all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the 
sum or value of [$50,000] $75,000, exclusive of interest and 
costs, and is between--
          (1) citizens of different States;
          * * * * * * *
    (b) Except when express provision therefor is otherwise 
made in a statute of the United States, where the plaintiff who 
files the case originally in the Federal courts is finally 
adjudged to be entitled to recover less than the sum or value 
of [$50,000] $75,000, computed without regard to any setoff or 
counterclaim to which the defendant may be adjudged to be 
entitled, and exclusive of interest and costs, the district 
court may deny costs to the plaintiff and, in addition, may 
impose costs on the plaintiff.
          * * * * * * *

                   CHAPTER 87--DISTRICT COURTS; VENUE

Sec.
1391. Venue generally.
[1392. Defendants or property in different districts in same State.]
1392. Property in different districts in same State.
[1393. Repealed.]
     * * * * * * *
1412. Change of venue.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 1392. Defendants or property in different districts in same 
                    State]

Sec. 1392. Property in different districts in same State

    [(a) Any civil action, not of a local nature, against 
defendants residing in different districts in the same State, 
may be brought in any of such districts.]
    [(b)] Any civil action, of a local nature, involving 
property located in different districts in the same State, may 
be brought in any of such districts.
          * * * * * * *

    CHAPTER 89--DISTRICT COURTS; REMOVAL OF CASES FROM STATE COURTS

Sec.
1441. Actions removable generally.
[1442. Federal officers sued or prosecuted.]
1442. Federal officers and agencies sued or prosecuted.
1442a. Members of armed forces sued or prosecuted.
     * * * * * * *
1452. Removal of claims related to bankruptcy cases.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1442. Federal officers or agencies sued or prosecuted

    (a) A civil action or criminal prosecution commenced in a 
State court against any of the following [persons] may be 
removed by them to the district court of the United States for 
the district and division embracing the place wherein it is 
pending:
          (1) [Any officer of the United States or any agency 
        thereof, a person acting under them, for any act under 
        color of such office] The United States or any agency 
        thereof or any officer (or any person acting under that 
        officer) of the United States or of any agency thereof, 
        sued in an official or individual capacity for any act 
        under color of such officer or on account of any right, 
        title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress 
        for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the 
        collection of the revenue.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1446. Procedure for removal

    (a) * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (c)(1) A notice of removal of a criminal prosecution shall 
be filed not later than thirty days after the arraignment in 
the State court, or at anytime before trial, whichever is 
earlier, except that for good cause shown the United States 
district court may enter an order granting the [petitioner] 
defendant or defendats leave to file the notice at a later 
time.
          * * * * * * *

                           PART V--PROCEDURE

                    CHAPTER III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec.
1651. Writs.
     * * * * * * *
1659. Protective orders and sealing of cases and settlements relating to 
          public health or safety.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1659. Protective orders and sealing of cases and settlements 
                    relating to public health or safety

    (a)(1) A court shall enter an order under rule 26(c) of the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure restricting the disclosure of 
information obtained through discovery or an order restricting 
access to court records in a civil case only after making 
particularized findings of fact that--
          (A) such order would not restrict the disclosure of 
        information which is relevant to the protection of 
        public health or safety; or
          (B)(i) the public interest in disclosure of potential 
        health or safety hazards is clearly outweighed by a 
        specific and substantial interest in maintaining the 
        confidentiality of the information or records in 
        question; and
          (ii) the requested protective order is no broader 
        than necessary to protect the privacy interest 
        asserted.
    (2) No order entered in accordance with the provisions of 
paragraph (1) shall continue in effect after the entry of final 
judgment, unless at or after such entry the court makes a 
separate particularized finding of fact that the requirements 
of paragraph (1) (A) or (B) have been met.
    (b) The party who is the proponent for the entry of an 
order, as provided under this section, shall have the burden of 
proof in obtaining such an order.
    (c)(1) No agreement between or among parties in a civil 
action filed in a court of the United States may contain a 
provision that prohibits or otherwise restricts a party from 
disclosing any information relevant to such civil action to any 
Federal or State agency with authority to enforce laws 
regulating an activity relating to such information.
    (2) Any disclosure of information to a Federal or State 
agency as described under paragraph (1) shall be confidential 
to the extent provided by law.
          * * * * * * *

                    CHAPTER 119--EVIDENCE; WITNESSES

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1827. Interpreters in courts of the United States

    (a) The Director of the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts shall establish a program to facilitate the use 
of certified and otherwise qualified interpreters in judicial 
proceedings instituted by the United States.
          * * * * * * *
    (g)(1) There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
Federal judiciary, and to be paid by the Director of the 
Administrative Office of the United States Courts, such sums as 
may be necessary to establish a program to facilitate the use 
of certified and otherwise qualified interpreters, and 
otherwise fulfill the provisions of this section and the 
Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act except as 
provided in paragraph (3).
          * * * * * * *
    (4) Upon the request of any person in any action for which 
interpreting services established pursuant to subsection (d) 
are not otherwise provided, the clerk of the court, or other 
court employee designated by the chief judge, upon the request 
of the president judicial officer, shall, where possible, make 
such services available to that person on a cost-reimbursable 
basis, but the judicial officer may be also require the 
prepayment of the estimated expenses of providing such 
services.
    (5) If the Director of the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts finds it necessary to develop and 
administer criterion-referenced performance examinations for 
purposes of certification or other examinations for the 
selection of otherwise qualified interpreters, the Director may 
prescribe for each examination a uniform fee for applicants to 
take such examination. In determining the rate of the fee for 
each examination, the Director shall consider the fees charged 
by other organizations for examinations that are similar in 
scope or nature. Notwithstanding section 3302(b) of title 31, 
the Director is authorized to provide in any contract or 
agreement for the development or administration of examinations 
and the collection of fees that the contractor may retain all 
or a portion of the fees in payment for the services. 
Notwithstanding paragraph (6) of this subsection, all fees 
collected after the effective date of this paragraph and not 
retained by a contractor shall be deposited in the fund 
established under section 1931 of this title and shall remain 
available until expended.
    [(5)](6) Any moneys collected under this subsection may be 
used to reimburse the appropriations obligated and disbursed in 
payment for such services.
          * * * * * * *
    (k) * * *
    (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section or 
section 1828, the presiding judicial officer may appoint a 
certified or otherwise qualified sign language interpreter to 
provide services to a party, witness, or other participant in a 
judicial proceeding, whether or not the proceeding is 
instituted by the Untied States, if the presiding judicial 
officer determines, on such officer's own motion or on the 
motion of a party or other participant in the proceeding, that 
such individual suffers from a hearing impairment. The 
presiding judicial officer shall, subject to the availability 
of appropriated funds, approve the compensation and expenses 
payable to sign language interpreters appointed under this 
section in accordance with the schedule of fees prescribed by 
the Director under subsection (b)(3) of this section.
          * * * * * * *

                      CHAPTER 123--FEES AND COSTS

Sec.
1911. Supreme Court.
     * * * * * * *
1931. Disposition of filing fees.
1932. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1914. District court; filing and miscellaneous fees; rules of 
                    court

    (a) The clerk of each district court shall require the 
parties instituting any civil action, suit or proceeding in 
such court, whether by original process, removal or otherwise, 
to pay a filing fee of [$120] $150, except that on application 
for a writ of habeas corpus the filing fee shall be $5.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1931. Disposition of filing fees

    (a) Of the amounts paid to the clerk of court as a fee 
under section 1914(a) or as part of a judgment for costs under 
section 2412(a)(2) of this title, [$60] $90 shall be deposited 
into a special fund of the Treasury to be available to offset 
funds appropriated for the operation and maintenance of the 
courts of the United States.
    (b) If the court authorizes a fee under section 1914(a) or 
an amount included in a judgment for costs under section 
2412(a)(2) of this title of less than [$120] $150, the entire 
fee or amount, up to [$60] $90, shall be deposited into the 
special fund provided in this section.

Sec. 1932. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation

    The Judicial Conference of the United States shall 
prescribe from time to time the fees and costs to be charged 
and collected by the Judicial Panel to Multidistrict 
Litigation.
          * * * * * * *

               CHAPTER 125--PENDING ACTIONS AND JUDGMENTS

Sec.
1961. Interest.
1962. Lien.
[1963. Registration of judgments of the district courts and the Courts 
          of International Trade.]
1963. Registration of judgments for enforcement in other districts.
[1963A. Repealed.]
1964. Construction notice of pending actions.
          * * * * * * *

[Sec. 1963. Registration of judgments of the district courts and the 
                    Court of International Trade]

Sec. 1963. Registration of judgments for enforcement in other districts

    A judgment in an action for the recovery of money or 
property entered in any [district court] court of appeals, 
district court, bankruptcy court, or in the Court of 
International Trade may be registered by filing a certified 
copy of [such judgment] the judgment in any other district or, 
with respect to the Court of International Trade, in any 
judicial district, when the judgment has become final by appeal 
or expiration of the time for appeal or when ordered by the 
court that entered the judgment for good cause shown. Such a 
judgment entered in favor of the United States may be so 
registered any time after judgment is entered. A judgment so 
registered shall have the same effect as a judgment of the 
district court of the district where registered and may be 
enforced in like manner.
    The procedure prescribed under this section is in addition 
to other procedures provided by law for the enforcement of 
judgments.
          * * * * * * *

                   CHAPTER 171--TORT CLAIMS PROCEDURE

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 2680. Exceptions

    The provisions of this chapter and section 1346(b) of this 
title shall not apply to--
    (a) Any claim based upon an act or omission of an employee 
of the Government, exercising due care, in the execution of a 
statute or regulation, whether or not such statute or 
regulation be valid, or based upon the exercise or performance 
or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function 
or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the 
Government, whether or not the discretion involved be abused.
          * * * * * * *
    (n) Any claim arising from the activities of a Federal land 
bank, a Federal intermediate credit bank, or a bank for 
cooperatives.
    (o) Any claim for money damages for injury, loss of 
liberty, loss of property, or personal injury or death arising 
from malpractice or negligence of an office or employee of a 
Federal Public Defender Organization in furnishing 
representational services under section 3006A of title 18.
          * * * * * * *

                TITLE 42--THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

          * * * * * * *

                        CHAPTER 21--CIVIL RIGHTS

                        Subchapter I--Generally

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights

    Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, 
regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the 
District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any 
citizen of the United States or other person within the 
jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, 
privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, 
shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit 
in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that 
in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or 
omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive 
relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was 
violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the 
purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable 
exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to 
be a statute of the District of Columbia.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1988. Proceedings in vindication of civil rights

    (a) Applicability of Statutory and Common Law.--
     The * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (b) Attorney's Fees.--
    In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of 
sections 1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985 and 1986 of this title, 
title IX of Public Law 92-318 [20 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1681 et seq.], 
the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 [42 U.S.C.A. 
Sec. 2000bb et seq.], title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 
[42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 2000d et seq.], or section 13981 of this 
title,, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing 
party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's 
fee as part of the costs, except that in any action brought 
against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such 
officer's judicial capacity such officer shall not be held 
liable for any costs, including attorney's fees, unless such 
action was clearly in excess of such officer's jurisdiction.
          * * * * * * *

                  CHAPTER 113--STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 10703. Board of Directors

    (a) Appointment and membership
          * * * * * * *
    (j) Open Meetings
    All meetings of the Board, any executive committee (on such 
occasions as it has been delegated the authority to act for the 
Board) of the Board, and any council established in connection 
with this, shall be open and subject to the requirements and 
provisions of section 552b of Title 5 relating to open 
meetings.
    (k) Duties and Functions of Board
    In its direction and supervision of the activities of the 
Institute, the Board shall--
          (1) establish polices and develop such programs for 
        the Institute that will further the achievement of its 
        purpose and performance of its functions;
          * * * * * * *
          (5) consider and recommend to both public and private 
        agencies aspects of the operation of the State courts 
        of the United States considered worthy of special 
        study; [and]
          (6) award grants and enter into cooperative 
        agreements or contracts pursuant to section 10705(a) of 
        the title[.] ;and
          (7) present an annual Howell Heflin Award in 
        recognition of an innovative Institute-supported 
        project that has a high likelihood of significantly 
        improving the quality of justice in State courts across 
        the Nation.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 10705. Grants and contracts

    (a) Authority of Institute; Purposes of Grants.--
          * * * * * * *
    (b) Priorty in Making Awards; Alternative Recipients; 
Approval of Applications; Receipt and Administration of Funds; 
Accountability.
    The Institute is empowered to award grants and enter into 
cooperative agreements or contracts as follows:
          (1) The Institute shall give highest priority to 
        awarding grants to and entering into cooperative 
        agreements or contracts with State and local courts.
          [(1)](2) The Institute may award grants to or enter 
        into cooperative agreements or contracts with--
                  [(A) State and local courts and their 
                agencies;]
                  [(B)](A) national nonprofit organizations 
                controlled by, operating in conjunction with, 
                and serving the judicial branches of State 
                governments; and
                  [C](B) national nonprofit organizations for 
                the education and training of judges and 
                support personnel of the judicial branch of 
                State governments.
          [(2)](3) The Institute may, if the objective can 
        better be served thereby, award grants to or enter into 
        cooperative agreements or contracts with--
                  (A) other nonprofit organizations with 
                expertise in judicial administration;
                  (B) institutions of higher education;
                  (C) individuals, partnerships, firms, or 
                corporations; and
                  (D) private agencies with expertise in 
                judicial administration
          [(3)](4) Upon application by an appropriate State or 
        local agency or institution and if the arrangements to 
        be made by such agency or institution will provide 
        services which could not be provided adequately through 
        nongovernmental arrangements the Institute may award a 
        grant or enter into a cooperative agreement or contract 
        with a unit of State or local government other than a 
        court.
          [(4)](5) The Institute may enter into contracts with 
        Federal agencies to carry out the purposes of this 
        chapter.
          [(5)](6) Each application for funding by a State or 
        local court shall be approved, consistent with State 
        law, by the State's supreme court, or its designated 
        agency or council, which shall receive, administer, and 
        be accountable for all funds awarded by the Institute 
        to such courts.
          (7) In making grants under this title, the Institute 
        shall undertake outreach efforts to assure the widest 
        feasible geographical distribution of grant funds and 
        benefits resulting from grants, consistent with its 
        mission to award grants having the greatest likelihood 
        of improving the quality of justice nationwide.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 10706. Limitations on grants and contracts

    (a) Duties of Institute.--
          * * * * * * *
    (d) Prohibited Uses of Funds.--
    To ensure that funds made available under this chapter are 
used to supplement and improve the operation of State courts, 
rather than to support basic court services or noncourt related 
activities of private organizations, funds shall not be used--
          (1) to supplant [State or local] State, local, or 
        private organizational funds currently supporting a 
        program or activity; [or]
          (2) to construct court facilities or structures, 
        except to remodel existing facilities to demonstrate 
        new architectural or technological techniques, or to 
        provide temporary facilities for new personnel or for 
        personnel involved in a demonstration or experimental 
        program [.] ; or
          (3) to support the activities of any national, State, 
        or local bar association, except for--
                  (A) the training of State court judges or 
                court personnel, if such training is not 
                provided by any person or entity other than a 
                bar association; or
                  (B) projects conducted in State courts or 
                directly in conjunction with State courts to 
                improve the efficiency of such courts.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 10712. [Report by Attorney General] REPORTS TO CONGRESS

    [On October 1, 1987, the Attorney General, in consultation 
with the Federal Judicial Center, shall transmit to the 
Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives a report on the effectiveness of the Institute 
in carrying out the duties specified in section 10702(b) of 
this title. Such report shall include an assessment of the cost 
effectiveness of the program as a whole and, to the extent 
practicable, of individual grants, an assessment of whether the 
restrictions and limitations specified in sections 10706 and 
10707 of this title have been respected, and such 
recommendations as the Attorney General, in consultation with 
the Federal Judicial Center, deems appropriate.]
    Effective January 1, 1997, the Institute shall provide 
semiannual reports to the Committees on the Judiciary of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives identifying all grants 
made by the Institute during the preceding six months. The 
report shall include the name and address of the grantee, the 
purpose of the project, the amount of funding provided, and the 
duration of the project.

Sec. 10713. Authorization of appropriations

    [There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the 
purposes of this chapter $20,000,000 for fiscal year 1993, 
$20,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, $25,000,000 for fiscal year 
1995, and $25,000,000 for fiscal year 1996. Amounts 
appropriated for each such year are to remain available until 
expended.]
    There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the 
purposes of this title $12,500,000 for each of fiscal years 
1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000, to remain available until expended.
          * * * * * * *

                          TITLE 45--RAILROADS

          * * * * * * *

                CHAPTER 16--REGIONAL RAIL REORGANIZATION

          * * * * * * *

            Subchapter II--United States Railway Association

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 719. Judicial review

    (a) General.--
    Notwithstanding * * *
          * * * * * * *
    (b) Special Court.--
          (1) Within 30 days after January 2, 1974, the 
        Association shall make application to the judicial 
        panel on multi-district litigation authorized by 
        section 1407 of title 28 for the consolidation in a 
        single, three-judge district court of the United States 
        of all judicial proceedings with respect to the final 
        system plan. Within 30 days after such application is 
        received, the panel shall make the consolidation in a 
        district court (cited herein as the ``special court'') 
        which the panel determines to be convenient to the 
        parties and the one most likely to be able to conduct 
        any proceedings under this section with the least delay 
        and the greatest possible fairness and ability. Such 
        proceedings shall be conducted by the special court 
        which shall be composed of three Federal judges who 
        shall be selected by the panel, except that none of the 
        judges selected may be a judge assigned to a proceeding 
        involving any railroad in reorganization in the region 
        under section 77 of the Bankruptcy Act. The special 
        court is authorized to exercise the powers of a 
        district judge in any judicial district with respect to 
        such proceedings and such powers shall include those of 
        a reorganization court. The special court shall have 
        the power to order the conveyance of rail properties of 
        railroads leased, operated, or controlled by a railroad 
        in reorganization in the region. The special court may 
        issue rules for the conduct of any proceedings under 
        this section and under section 745 of this title, 
        including rules with respect to the time within which 
        motions may be filed, and with respect to appropriate 
        representation of interests not otherwise represented 
        (including the Secretary with respect to a petition by 
        the Association in the case of a proposal developed by 
        the Secretary, under such section 745 of this title). 
        No determination by the panel under this subsection may 
        be reviewed in any court.
          (2) The special court referred to in paragraph (1) of 
        this subsection is abolished effective 90 days after 
        the date of enactment of the Federal Courts Improvement 
        Act of 1996. On such effective date, all jurisdiction 
        and other functions of the special court shall be 
        assumed by the United States District Court for the 
        District of Columbia. With respect to any proceedings 
        that arise or continue after the date on which the 
        especial court is abolished, the references in the 
        following provisions to the special court established 
        under this subsection shall be deemed to refer to the 
        United States District Court for the District of 
        Columbia:
                  (A) Subsections (c), (e)(1), (e)(2), (f) and 
                (g) of this section.
                  (B) Sections 202 (d)(3), (g), 207 (a)(1), 
                (b)(1), (b)(2), 208(d)(2), 301 (e)(2), (g), 
                (k)(3), (k)(15), 303 (a)(1), (a)(2), (b)(1), 
                (b)(6)(A), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), 
                (c)(5), 304 (a)(1)(B), (i)(3), 305 (c), (d)(1), 
                (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), (d)(8), (e), 
                (f)(1), (f)(2)(B), (f)(2)(D), (f)(2)(E), 
                (f)(3), 306 (a), (b), (c)(4) and 601 (b)(3), 
                (c) of this Act (45 U.S.C. 712 (d)(3), (g), 717 
                (a)(1), (b)(1), (b)(2), 718(d)(2), 741 (e)(2), 
                (g), (k)(3), (k)(15), 743 (a)(1), (a)(2), 
                (b)(1), (b)(6)(A), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), 
                (c)(4), (c)(5), 744 (a)(1)(B), (i)(3), 745 (c), 
                (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), (d)(5), (d)(8), 
                (e), (f)(1), (f)(2)(B), (f)(2)(D), (f)(2)(E), 
                (f)(3), 746 (a), (b), (c)(4), 791(b)(3), (c).
                  (C) Sections 1152(a) and 1167(b) of the 
                Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981 (45 U.S.C. 
                1105(a), 1115(a)).
                  (D) Sections 4023 (2)(A)(iii), (2)(B), 
                (2)(C), (3)(C), (3)(E), (4)(A) and 4025(b) of 
                the Conrail Privatization Act (45 U.S.C. 1323 
                (2)(A)(iii), (2)(B), (2)(C), (3)(C), (3)(E), 
                (4)(A), 1324(b)).
                  (E) Section 24907(b) of title 49, United 
                States Code.
                  (F) Any other Federal law (other than this 
                subsection and section 605 of the Federal 
                Courts Improvement Act of 1996), Executive 
                order, rule, regulation, delegation of 
                authority, or document of or relating to the 
                special court as previously established under 
                paragraph (1) of this subsection.
          * * * * * * *
    (e) Original and Exclusive Jurisdiction.--
          * * * * * * *
          [(3) A final order or judgment of the special court 
        in any action referred to in this section shall be 
        reviewable only upon petition for a writ of certiorari 
        to the Supreme Court of the United States. Such review 
        is exclusive and any such petition shall be filed in 
        the Supreme Court not more than 20 days after entry of 
        such order or judgment.]
          (3) An order or judgment of the United States 
        District Court for the District of Columbia in any 
        action referred to in this section shall be reviewable 
        in accordance with sections 1291, 1292, and 1294 of 
        title 28, United States Code.
          * * * * * * *
    (g) Stay of Court Proceedings.--
    The special court may stay or enjoin any action or 
proceeding in any State court or in any court of the United 
States other than the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit if such action or proceeding is 
contrary to any provision of this chapter, impairs the 
effective implementation of this chapter, or interferes with 
the execution of any order of the special court pursuant to 
this chapter.
    [(h) Special Masters.--
          [(1) The special court may appoint and fix the 
        compensation and assign the duties of such special 
        masters as it considers necessary or appropriate to 
        conduct hearings, receive evidence and report thereon 
        to the special court, and perform such other acts as 
        the special court may require. The special court may 
        employ such special masters by contract or otherwise, 
        without regard to section 5 of title 41 or part III of 
        title 5, on such terms and conditions as it may 
        determine. Such special masters shall not be deemed to 
        be employees of the Federal Government or any 
        department, agency, or instrumentality thereof. The 
        special court may also appoint employees in such number 
        as may be approved by the Director of the 
        Administrative Office of the United States Courts, and 
        may procure such administrative services as may be 
        necessary for it or the special masters to complete 
        their assignments expeditiously.
          [(2) There are authorized to be appropriated such 
        sums as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this 
        subsection. Sums appropriated under this subsection are 
        authorized to remain available until expended.]
          * * * * * * *

             Subchapter III--Consolidated Rail Corporation

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 743. Valuation and conveyance of rail properties

          * * * * * * *
    [(d) Review--
    [A finding or determination entered by the special court 
pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or section 746 of 
this title shall be reviewable only upon petition for a writ of 
certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States. Such 
review is exclusive and any such petition shall be filed in the 
Supreme Court not more than 20 days after entry of such finding 
or determination.]
    (d) Appeal.--
    An order or judgment entered by the United States District 
Court for the District of Columbia pursuant to subsection (c) 
of this section or section 746 of this title shall be 
reviewable in accordance with sections 1291, 1292, and 1294 of 
title 28, Untied States Code.
          * * * * * * *

Sec. 745. Continuing reorganization; supplemental transactions

          * * * * * * *
    (d) Special Court Proceedings.--
          * * * * * * *
          (4) In proceedings under this subsection, the special 
        court is authorized to exercise the powers of [a judge 
        of a United States district court with respect to such 
        proceedings and such powers shall include those of] a 
        reorganization court.
          * * * * * * *

                   CHAPTER 20--NORTHEAST RAIL SERVICE

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 1104. Definitions

    As used in this subtitle, unless the context otherwise 
requires, the term:
          (1) ``Amtrak'' means the National Railroad Passenger 
        Corporation created under title III of the Rail 
        Passenger Service Act.
          * * * * * * *
          [(8) ``Special court'' means the judicial panel 
        established under section 209 of the Regional Rail 
        Reorganization Act of 1973.]
          (8) ``Special court'' means the judicial pane 
        established under section 209(b)(1) of the Regional 
        Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (45 U.S.C. 719(b)(1)) 
        or, with respect to any proceedings that arise or 
        continue after the panel is abolished pursuant to 
        section 209(b)(2) of such Act, the United States 
        District Court for the District of Columbia.

Sec. 1105. Judicial review

          * * * * * * *
    [(b) Exclusive Review by Writ of Certiorari to Supreme 
Court.--
    [A judgment of the special court in any action referred to 
in this section shall be reviewable only upon petition for a 
writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States. 
Such review is exclusive and any such petition shall be filed 
in the Supreme Court not more than 20 days after entry of such 
order or judgment.]
    (b) Appeal.--
    An order or judgment of the United States District Court 
for the District of Columbia in any action referred to in this 
section shall be reviewable in accordance with sections 
1291,1292, and 1294 of title 28, Untied States Code.
          * * * * * * *
    [(d) Assignment of Additional Judges.--
    [If the volume of civil actions under subsection (a) of 
this section so requires, the United States Railway Association 
shall apply to the judicial panel on multi-district litigation 
authorized by section 1407 of title 28 for the assignment of 
additional judges to the special court. Within 30 days after 
the date of such application, the panel shall assign to the 
special court such additional judges as may be necessary to 
exercise the jurisdiction described in subsection (a) of this 
section.]
          * * * * * * *

     Section 140 of the Joint Resolution Making Further Continuing 
    Appropriations for the Fiscal Year 1982, and for Other Purposes

                           (Public Law 97-92)

          * * * * * * *

                        TITLE IV--THE JUDICIARY

          * * * * * * *
    [Sec. 140. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or of 
this joint resolution, none of the funds appropriated by this 
joint resolution or by any other Act shall be obligated or 
expended to increase, after the date of enactment of this joint 
resolution, any salary of any Federal judge or Justice of the 
Supreme Court, except as may be specifically authorized by Act 
of Congress hereafter enacted: Provided, That nothing in this 
limitation shall be construed to reduce any salary which may be 
in effect at the time of enactment of this joint resolution nor 
shall this limitation be construed in any manner to reduce the 
salary of any Federal judge or of any Justice of the Supreme 
Court.]
                              ----------                              * 
* * * *


 Section 120 of the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 
                                  1984

                          (Public Law 98-353)

             TITLE I--BANKRUPTCY JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE

          * * * * * * *
    Sec. 120.(a)(1) Whenever a court of appeals is authorized 
to fill a vacancy that occurs on a bankruptcy court of the 
United States, such court of appeals shall appoint to fill that 
vacancy a person whose character, experience, ability, and 
impartiality qualify such person to serve in the Federal 
judiciary.
    (2) It is the sense of the Congress that the courts of 
appeals should consider for appointment under section 152 of 
title 28, United States Code, to the first vacancy which arises 
after the date of the enactment of this Act in the office of 
each bankruptcy judge, the bankruptcy judge who holds such 
office immediately before such vacancy arises, if such 
bankruptcy judge requests to be considered for such 
appointment.
    (3) When filing vacancies, the court of appeals may 
consider reappointing incumbent bankruptcy judges under 
procedures prescribed by regulations issued by the Judicial 
Conference of the United States.
    (b) The judicial council of the circuit involved shall 
assist the court of appeals by evaluating potential nominees 
and by recommending to such court for consideration for 
appointment to each vacancy on the bankruptcy court persons who 
are qualified to be bankruptcy judges under regulations 
prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States. In 
the case of the firsts vacancy which arises after the date of 
the enactment of this Act in the office of each bankruptcy 
judge, such potential nominees shall include the bankruptcy 
judge who holds such office immediately before such vacancy 
arises, if such bankruptcy judge requests to be considered for 
such appointment and the judicial council determines that such 
judge is qualified under subsection (c) of this section to 
continue to serve. Such potential nominees shall receive 
consideration equal to that given all other potential nominees 
for such position. All incumbent nominees seeking reappointment 
thereafter may be considered for such a reappointment, pursuant 
to a majority vote of the judges of the appointing court of 
appeals, under procedures authorized under subsection (a)(3).
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


         Section 203 of the Judicial Improvements Act of  1990

                          (Public Law 101-650)

          * * * * * * *

                      TITLE II--FEDERAL JUDGESHIPS

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 203. DISTRICT JUDGES FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS.

    (a) In General.--The President shall appoint, by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate--
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Temporary Judgeships.--The President shall appoint, by 
and with the advice and consent of the Senate--
          (1) 1 additional district judge for the northern 
        district of Alabama;
          * * * * * * *
          (13) 1 additional district judge for the eastern 
        district of Virginia.

The first vacancy in the office of district judge in each of 
the judicial districts named in this subsection, occurring 5 
years or more after the effective date of this title, shall not 
be filled. For districts named in this subsection for which 
multiple judgeships are created by this Act, the last of those 
judgeships filled shall be the judgeship created under this 
subsection.
          * * * * * * *

  Section 303 of the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the 
        Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1992

                          (Public Law 102-140)

          * * * * * * *

                        TITLE III--THE JUDICIARY

          * * * * * * *

                   GENERAL PROVISIONS--THE JUDICIARY

          * * * * * * *
    Sec. 303. (a) The Judicial Conference shall hereafter 
prescribe reasonable fees, pursuant to sections 1913, 1914, 
[1926, and 1930] 1926, 1930, and 1932  of title 28, United 
States Code, for collection by the courts under those sections 
for access to information available through automatic data 
processing equipment. These fees may distinguish between 
classes of persons, and shall provide for exempting persons or 
classes of persons from the fees, in order to avoid 
unreasonable burdens and to promote public access to such 
information. The Director of the Administrative Office of the 
United States Courts, under the direction of the Judicial 
Conference of the United States, shall prescribe a schedule of 
reasonable fees for electronic access to information which the 
Director is required to maintain and make available to the 
public.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


           Section 3 of the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 1992

                          (Public Law 102-361)

          * * * * * * *

Sec. 3. TEMPORARY JUDGESHIPS.

    (a) Appointments.--The following bankruptcy judges shall be 
appointed in the manner prescribed in section 152(a)(1) of 
title 28, United States Code:
          (1) 1 additional bankruptcy judge for the northern 
        district of Alabama.
          * * * * * * *
          (10) 1 additional bankruptcy judge for the western 
        district of Texas.
    (b) Vacancies.--The first vacancy in the office of 
bankruptcy judge in each of the judicial districts set forth in 
subsection (a) resulting from the death, retirement, 
resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge, and occurring 5 
years or more after the [date of the enactment of this Act] 
appointment date of the judge named to fill the temporary 
judgeship position, shall not be filled. In the case of a 
vacancy resulting from the expiration of the term of a 
bankruptcy judge not described in the preceding sentence, that 
judge shall be eligible for reappointment as a bankruptcy judge 
in that district.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


          Section 104 of the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990

                          (28 U.S.C. 471 note)

          * * * * * * *

        TITLE I--CIVIL JUSTICE EXPENSE AND DELAY REDUCTION PLANS

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 104. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--(1) During the 5-year period beginning on 
January 1, 1991, the Judicial Conference of the United States 
shall conduct a demonstration program in accordance with 
subsection (b).
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Study of Results.--The Judicial Conference of the 
United States, in consultation with the Director of the Federal 
Judicial Center and the Director of the Administrative Office 
of the United States Courts, shall study the experience of the 
district courts under the demonstration program.
    (d) Report.--Not later than [December 31, 1996,] June 30, 
1997, the Judicial Conference of the United States shall 
transmit to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives a report of the results of the 
demonstration program.

SEC 105. PILOT PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--(1) During the 5-year period beginning on 
January 1, 1991, the Judicial Conference of the United States 
shall conduct a pilot program in accordance with subsection 
(b).
    (2) A district court participating in the pilot program 
shall be designated as an Early Implementation District Court 
under section 103(c).
          * * * * * * *
    (c) Program Study Report.--(1) Not later than [December 31, 
1995,] June 30, 1997, the Judicial Conference shall submit to 
the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and House of 
Representatives a report on the results of the pilot program 
under this section that includes an assessment of the extent to 
which costs and delays were reduced as a result of the program. 
The report shall compare those results to the impact on costs 
and delays in ten comparable judicial districts for which the 
application of section 473(a) of title 28, United States Code, 
had been discretionary. That comparison shall be based on a 
study conducted by an independent organization with expertise 
in the area of the Federal court management.
          * * * * * * *
                              ----------                              


   Section 905 of the Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act

                          (28 U.S.C. 651 note)

          * * * * * * *

                         TITLE IX--ARBITRATION

          * * * * * * *

SEC. 905 AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated for each of the 
fiscal years 1994 through [1997] 1998 for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 1989, and for each of the succeeding 4 
fiscal years, to the judicial branch such sums as may be 
necessary to carry out the purposes of chapter 44, as added by 
section 901 of this Act. Funds appropriated under this section 
shall be allocated by the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts to Federal judicial districts and the Federal 
Judicial Center. The funds so appropriated are authorized to 
remain available until expended.