[House Report 109-371]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    109-371

======================================================================
 
            FEDERAL JUDICIARY EMERGENCY TOLLING ACT OF 2005

                                _______
                                

February 8, 2006.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3729]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 3729) to provide emergency authority to delay or toll 
judicial proceedings in United States district and circuit 
courts, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 
with an amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do 
pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
The Amendment....................................................     1
Purpose and Summary..............................................     3
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     3
Hearings.........................................................     4
Committee Consideration..........................................     4
Vote of the Committee............................................     4
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................     4
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     5
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     5
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................     6
Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion.......................     6
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     7
Markup Transcript................................................     9

                             The Amendment

  The amendment is as follows:
    Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Judiciary Emergency Tolling 
Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. EMERGENCY AUTHORITY TO DELAY OR TOLL JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 1660. Emergency authority to delay or toll judicial deadlines

    ``(a) Tolling in District Courts.--
            ``(1) In general.--In the event of a natural disaster or 
        other emergency situation requiring the closure of courts or 
        rendering it impracticable for the United States Government or 
        a class of litigants to comply with deadlines imposed by any 
        Federal or State law or rule that applies in the courts of the 
        United States, the chief judge of a district court that has 
        been affected may exercise emergency authority in accordance 
        with this section.
            ``(2) Scope of authority.--(A) The chief judge may enter 
        such order or orders as may be appropriate to delay, toll, or 
        otherwise grant relief from the time deadlines imposed by 
        otherwise applicable laws or rules for such period as may be 
        appropriate for any class of cases pending or thereafter filed 
        in the district court or bankruptcy court of the district.
            ``(B) Except as provided in subparagraph (C), the authority 
        conferred by this section extends to all laws and rules 
        affecting criminal and juvenile proceedings (including, 
        prearrest, post-arrest, pretrial, trial, and post-trial 
        procedures), civil actions, bankruptcy proceedings, and the 
        time for filing and perfecting an appeal.
            ``(C) The authority conferred by this section does not 
        include the authority to extend--
                    ``(i) any statute of limitation for a criminal 
                action; or
                    ``(ii) any statute of limitation for a civil 
                action, if--
                            ``(I) the claim arises under the laws of a 
                        State; and
                            ``(II) extending the limitations period 
                        would be inconsistent with the governing State 
                        law.
            ``(3) Unavailability of chief judge.--If the chief judge of 
        the district is unavailable, the authority conferred by this 
        section may be exercised by the district judge in regular 
        active service who is senior in commission or, if no such judge 
        is available, by the chief judge of the circuit that includes 
        the district.
            ``(4) Habeas corpus unaffected.--Nothing in this section 
        shall be construed to authorize suspension of the writ of 
        habeas corpus.
    ``(b) Criminal Cases.--In exercising the authority under subsection 
(a) for criminal cases, the court shall consider the ability of the 
United States Government to investigate, litigate, and process 
defendants during and after the emergency situation, as well as the 
ability of criminal defendants as a class to prepare their defenses.
    ``(c) Tolling in Courts of Appeals.--
            ``(1) In general.--In the event of a natural disaster or 
        other emergency situation requiring the closure of courts or 
        rendering it impracticable for the United States Government or 
        a class of litigants to comply with deadlines imposed by any 
        federal or States law or rule that applies in the courts of the 
        United States, the chief judge of a court of appeals that has 
        been affected or that includes a district court so affected may 
        exercise emergency authority in accordance with this section.
            ``(2) Scope of authority.--The chief judge may enter such 
        order or orders as may be appropriate to delay, toll, or 
        otherwise grant relief from the time deadlines imposed by 
        otherwise applicable laws or rules for such period as may be 
        appropriate for any class of cases pending in the court of 
        appeals.
            ``(3) Unavailability of chief judge.--If the chief judge of 
        the circuit is unavailable, the authority conferred by this 
        section may be exercised by the circuit judge in regular active 
        service who is senior in commission.
            ``(4) Habeas corpus unaffected.--Nothing in this section 
        shall be construed to authorize suspension of the writ of 
        habeas corpus.
    ``(d) Issuance of Orders.--The Attorney General or the Attorney 
General's designee may request issuance of an order under this section, 
or the chief judge of a district or of a circuit may act on his or her 
own motion.
    ``(e) Duration of Orders.--An order entered under this section may 
not toll or extend a time deadline for a period of more than 14 days, 
except that, if the chief judge (whether of a district or of a circuit) 
determines that an emergency situation requires additional extensions 
of the period during which deadlines are tolled or extended, the chief 
judge may, with the consent of the judicial council of the circuit, 
enter additional orders under this section in order to further toll or 
extend such time deadline.
    ``(f) Notice.--A court issuing an order under this section--
            ``(1) shall make all reasonable efforts to publicize the 
        order, including announcing the order on the web sites of all 
        affected courts and the web site of the Federal judiciary; and
            ``(2) shall, through the Director of the Administrative 
        Office of the United States Courts, send notice of the order, 
        including the reasons for the issuance of the order, to the 
        Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on 
        the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
    ``(g) Required Reports.--A court issuing one or more orders under 
this section relating to an emergency situation shall, not later than 
180 days after the date on which the last extension or tolling of a 
time period made by the order or orders ends, submit a brief report to 
the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate, the Committee on the 
Judiciary of the House of Representatives, and the Judicial Conference 
of the United States describing the orders, including--
            ``(1) the reasons for issuing the orders;
            ``(2) the duration of the orders;
            ``(3) the effects of the orders on litigants; and
            ``(4) the costs to the judiciary resulting from the orders.
    ``(h) Exceptions.--The notice under subsection (f)(2) and the 
report under subsection (g) are not required in the case of an order 
that tolls or extends a time deadline for a period of less than 14 
days.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at 
the end the following new item:

``1660. Emergency authority to delay or toll judicial deadlines.''.

                          Purpose and Summary

    The purpose of H.R. 3729 is to amend 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1660 to 
allow the chief judge of any district court (or, if 
unavailable, the next most senior active district judge in the 
district or the chief judge of the court of appeals for the 
circuit in which the district is located), to enter an order or 
orders to delay or toll any and all deadlines imposed by any 
statute or rule of procedure whenever the district court is 
closed by virtue of any natural disaster, civil disobedience, 
or other emergency situation. The bill allows the chief judge 
to make this motion either on his own determination or at the 
request of the Attorney General or his designee.
    When a judge makes a motion to delay or toll court 
deadlines under this section, he or she may take into 
consideration solely the burden on the government to comply 
with deadlines in the aftermath of a natural disaster or other 
emergency situation when granting the motion. Subsection (b) of 
the new 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1660 would make clear that, in setting 
new time limits applicable in criminal cases, the court must 
consider the government's ability to investigate, litigate and 
process defendants during and beyond the emergency situation. 
Subsection (c) of the new section would provide like authority 
to the chief judge of the court of appeals for the circuit when 
the court of appeals itself is so affected.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    The need for this legislation initially became apparent 
following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the 
impact of these disasters on court operations, particularly in 
New York City. In emergency conditions, a Federal courthouse 
may be closed for extended periods of time. As was made clear 
in the aftermath of September 11th and the hurricanes of 
calendar year 2005, in an emergency situation, law enforcement 
may have to devote an overwhelming majority of their resources 
and manpower to ensuring the safety of the area and 
investigating criminal behavior that may occur. Large classes 
of litigants may also be negatively affected by an emergency 
situation and may be unable to meet the deadlines required in 
their pending civil or criminal cases.
    Currently, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(a), a 
judge may extend the deadline on a per-day basis, if weather or 
other conditions have made the office of the clerk or the 
district court inaccessible. A district judge has similar 
authority in criminal cases under Rule 45 of the Federal Rules 
of Criminal Procedure. However, both of these rules only allow 
the judge to make this determination when conditions render the 
clerk of court inaccessible and only on a daily basis. H.R. 
3729 allows a judge to extend deadlines in an emergency 
situation for an appropriate time according to the judge's 
discretion.
    This legislation is also needed to address natural 
disasters. The recent impact of Hurricane Katrina on the 
Federal courts in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi has 
increased the urgency of congressional action regarding this 
proposal. Where court operations cannot be transferred to other 
divisions within the affected judicial district due to 
widespread flooding and destruction, judges must be empowered 
to delay or toll deadlines for pending cases where appropriate.

                                Hearings

    The House Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on 
H.R. 3729.

                        Committee Consideration

    On September 13, 2005, the House Committee on the Judiciary 
received an exclusive referral for H.R. 3729. On November 9, 
2005, the Committee met in open session and ordered favorably 
reported the bill H.R. 3729, as amended, by voice vote, a 
quorum being present.

                         Vote of the Committee

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of Rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee notes that there 
were no recorded votes during the Committee consideration of 
H.R. 3729.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of Rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is inapplicable because this legislation does 
not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax 
expenditures.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of Rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with 
respect to the bill, H.R. 3729, the following estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under the section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, November 29, 2005.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3729, the 
``Federal Judiciary Emergency Tolling Act of 2005.''
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Gregory 
Waring, who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                       Douglas Holtz-Eakin.

Enclosure

cc:
        Honorable John Conyers, Jr.
        Ranking Member
H.R. 3729--Federal Judiciary Emergency Tolling Act of 2005.
    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3729 would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget and would not affect 
direct spending or revenues. H.R. 3729 contains no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on 
State, local, or tribal governments.
    Enacting H.R. 3729 would provide chief judges of federal 
courts the authority to delay time deadlines and proceedings of 
certain criminal and civil cases, including bankruptcy 
proceedings, in the event of a natural disaster or other 
emergency. CBO cannot predict when or how often such situations 
may arise that would close the courts or make it difficult for 
litigants to comply with court rules and deadlines. Based on 
information from the Administrative Office of the United States 
Courts, however, the cost of issuing such orders would be 
negligible.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Gregory Waring, 
who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was approved by 
Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget 
Analysis.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee expects that enactment of H.R. 3729 will 
allow the operation of the Federal judiciary to continue in the 
event of widespread damage resulting from a natural disaster or 
emergency situation. Federal civil and criminal cases will not 
be dismissed based on delays created from an emergency 
situation and the chief judge of a Federal district or circuit 
will have limited discretion to delay or toll deadlines 
according to need.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of Rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for 
this legislation in art. I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution.

               Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion

Section 1. Short Title.
    The act may be cited as the ``Federal Judiciary Emergency 
Tolling Act of 2005.''
Section 2. Emergency Authority to Delay or Toll Judicial Proceedings.
    In the event of a natural disaster or other emergency 
situation requiring the closure of courts or other emergency 
situation rendering it impracticable for the government or a 
class of litigants to comply with deadlines imposed by any 
Federal or State rule that applies in the courts of the United 
States, the chief judge of the affected district may exercise 
emergency authority to enter an order to toll, delay, or 
otherwise grant relief from deadlines imposed for any cases 
pending or thereafter filed in a district court or bankruptcy 
court. This authority extends to all laws and rules affecting 
criminal and juvenile proceedings, civil actions, bankruptcy 
proceedings, and the time for filing and perfecting an appeal. 
This authority does not extend to any statute of limitation for 
a criminal action or any statute of limitation for a civil 
action if the claim arises under the laws of a State and 
extending limitations would be inconsistent with the governing 
State law.
    In addition, section 2 provides that if the chief judge of 
the district is unavailable, the authority is conferred to the 
district judge in regular active service who is senior in 
commission or if no such judge is available, the chief judge of 
the circuit that includes the district.
    Habeas Corpus Unaffected. This section also expressly 
provides that nothing in this section is to be construed to 
authorize suspension of habeas corpus.
    Criminal Cases. This section mandates that a court must 
consider the ability of the government, in criminal cases, to 
investigate, litigate, and process defendants during and after 
an emergency situation, as well as the ability of criminal 
defendants, as a class to prepare defenses.
    Tolling in Courts of Appeals. This section also provides 
authority to Federal appellate courts. The chief judge of a 
circuit or his designee, in the event of his or her absence, 
may enter an order to toll or delay deadlines for cases pending 
in the court of appeals. A chief judge of a circuit may not 
authorize suspension of habeas corpus.
    Issuance of Orders. The Attorney General or his designee 
may request issuance of an order under this section or the 
chief judge of a district or a circuit may act on his or her 
own motion.
    Duration of an Order. An order to extend or toll a deadline 
may not exceed 14 days, except where a judge determines that an 
emergency situation requires additional extensions of the 
period during which deadlines are delayed or tolled, he or she 
may, with the consent of the judicial council of the circuit, 
enter additional orders under this section in order to further 
extend the deadline.
    Notice. A court issuing an order under this section must: 
make all reasonable efforts to publicize the order, including 
announcing the order on the web sites of all affected courts 
and the web site of the Federal judiciary; and the Director of 
the Administrative Office of the Courts must send notice, 
including reasons for the issuance, to the House and Senate 
Judiciary Committees.
    Reporting Requirement. A court issuing one or more orders 
under this section must submit a brief report to the House and 
Senate Judiciary Committees, and the Judicial Conference of the 
United States describing the impact of the order--including the 
reasons for issuing the order, the duration, the impact of the 
order on litigants, and the costs to the judiciary. The report 
must be filed within 180 days after the last extension or 
tolling of a time period made by an order ends. A report is 
only required under this section if the court issues one or 
more orders that toll or extend a time deadline for more than 
14 consecutive days.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of Rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

     TITLE deg.CHAPTER 111 OF TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE

                     CHAPTER 111--GENRAL PROVISIONS

Sec.
1651.  Writs.
     * * * * * * *
1660. Emergency authority to delay or toll judicial deadlines.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 1660. Emergency authority to delay or toll judicial deadlines

    (a) Tolling in District Courts.--
            (1) In general.--In the event of a natural disaster 
        or other emergency situation requiring the closure of 
        courts or rendering it impracticable for the United 
        States Government or a class of litigants to comply 
        with deadlines imposed by any Federal or State law or 
        rule that applies in the courts of the United States, 
        the chief judge of a district court that has been 
        affected may exercise emergency authority in accordance 
        with this section.
            (2) Scope of authority.--(A) The chief judge may 
        enter such order or orders as may be appropriate to 
        delay, toll, or otherwise grant relief from the time 
        deadlines imposed by otherwise applicable laws or rules 
        for such period as may be appropriate for any class of 
        cases pending or thereafter filed in the district court 
        or bankruptcy court of the district.
            (B) Except as provided in subparagraph (C), the 
        authority conferred by this section extends to all laws 
        and rules affecting criminal and juvenile proceedings 
        (including, prearrest, post-arrest, pretrial, trial, 
        and post-trial procedures), civil actions, bankruptcy 
        proceedings, and the time for filing and perfecting an 
        appeal.
            (C) The authority conferred by this section does 
        not include the authority to extend--
                    (i) any statute of limitation for a 
                criminal action; or
                    (ii) any statute of limitation for a civil 
                action, if--
                            (I) the claim arises under the laws 
                        of a State; and
                            (II) extending the limitations 
                        period would be inconsistent with the 
                        governing State law.
            (3) Unavailability of chief judge.--If the chief 
        judge of the district is unavailable, the authority 
        conferred by this section may be exercised by the 
        district judge in regular active service who is senior 
        in commission or, if no such judge is available, by the 
        chief judge of the circuit that includes the district.
            (4) Habeas corpus unaffected.--Nothing in this 
        section shall be construed to authorize suspension of 
        the writ of habeas corpus.
    (b) Criminal Cases.--In exercising the authority under 
subsection (a) for criminal cases, the court shall consider the 
ability of the United States Government to investigate, 
litigate, and process defendants during and after the emergency 
situation, as well as the ability of criminal defendants as a 
class to prepare their defenses.
    (c) Tolling in Courts of Appeals.--
            (1) In general.--In the event of a natural disaster 
        or other emergency situation requiring the closure of 
        courts or rendering it impracticable for the United 
        States Government or a class of litigants to comply 
        with deadlines imposed by any federal or States law or 
        rule that applies in the courts of the United States, 
        the chief judge of a court of appeals that has been 
        affected or that includes a district court so affected 
        may exercise emergency authority in accordance with 
        this section.
            (2) Scope of authority.--The chief judge may enter 
        such order or orders as may be appropriate to delay, 
        toll, or otherwise grant relief from the time deadlines 
        imposed by otherwise applicable laws or rules for such 
        period as may be appropriate for any class of cases 
        pending in the court of appeals.
            (3) Unavailability of chief judge.--If the chief 
        judge of the circuit is unavailable, the authority 
        conferred by this section may be exercised by the 
        circuit judge in regular active service who is senior 
        in commission.
            (4) Habeas corpus unaffected.--Nothing in this 
        section shall be construed to authorize suspension of 
        the writ of habeas corpus.
    (d) Issuance of Orders.--The Attorney General or the 
Attorney General's designee may request issuance of an order 
under this section, or the chief judge of a district or of a 
circuit may act on his or her own motion.
    (e) Duration of Orders.--An order entered under this 
section may not toll or extend a time deadline for a period of 
more than 14 days, except that, if the chief judge (whether of 
a district or of a circuit) determines that an emergency 
situation requires additional extensions of the period during 
which deadlines are tolled or extended, the chief judge may, 
with the consent of the judicial council of the circuit, enter 
additional orders under this section in order to further toll 
or extend such time deadline.
    (f) Notice.--A court issuing an order under this section--
            (1) shall make all reasonable efforts to publicize 
        the order, including announcing the order on the web 
        sites of all affected courts and the web site of the 
        Federal judiciary; and
            (2) shall, through the Director of the 
        Administrative Office of the United States Courts, send 
        notice of the order, including the reasons for the 
        issuance of the order, to the Committee on the 
        Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the 
        Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
    (g) Required Reports.--A court issuing one or more orders 
under this section relating to an emergency situation shall, 
not later than 180 days after the date on which the last 
extension or tolling of a time period made by the order or 
orders ends, submit a brief report to the Committee on the 
Judiciary of the Senate, the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
House of Representatives, and the Judicial Conference of the 
United States describing the orders, including--
            (1) the reasons for issuing the orders;
            (2) the duration of the orders;
            (3) the effects of the orders on litigants; and
            (4) the costs to the judiciary resulting from the 
        orders.
    (h) Exceptions.--The notice under subsection (f)(2) and the 
report under subsection (g) are not required in the case of an 
order that tolls or extends a time deadline for a period of 
less than 14 days.

                           Markup Transcript



                            BUSINESS MEETING

                      WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2005

                  House of Representatives,
                                Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in 
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable F. 
James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Committee will come to order.
    [Intervening business.]
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Now, pursuant to notice, I call up 
the bill H.R. 3729, to provide emergency authority to delay or 
toll judicial proceedings in the United States district and 
circuit courts, for purposes of markup and move its favorable 
recommendation to the House. Without objection, the bill will 
be considered as read and open for amendment at any point.
    [The bill, H.R. 3729, follows:]
      
      

  


      
      

  


      
      

  


    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Chair recognizes himself for 5 
minutes to explain the bill.
    This bill would grant the chief judge of any district court 
or appeals court the authority to enter an order to delay or 
toll any deadlines on pending court cases whenever an effective 
court is closed due to a natural disaster, civil disobedience, 
or other emergency situation. I think this is pretty self-
explanatory. It's discretionary with the judge. If the 
courthouse is closed, obviously deadlines can't be enforced.
    I will have an amendment in the nature of a substitute to 
offer at the appropriate time and yield back the balance of my 
time.
    Mr. Watt. Mr. Chairman?
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Does the gentleman from Michigan 
wish to give an opening statement?
    Mr. Conyers. No. I'll yield to the gentleman from North 
Carolina.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The gentleman from North Carolina 
is recognized for an opening statement.
    Mr. Watt. I don't have an opening statement. I just wanted 
to ask a question at an appropriate time. Maybe it's better to 
ask it when you introduce the amendment.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Whenever. Does the gentleman from 
Michigan have an opening statement?
    Mr. Conyers. I'll ask that it go in the record.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, all Members----
    Mr. Conyers. And I support the measure.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. All Members may include opening 
statements in the record at this time.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Conyers follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr., a Representative 
 in Congress from the State of Michigan, and Ranking Member, Committee 
                            on the Judiciary
    Let me begin by thanking Chairman Sensenbrenner for his willingness 
to work with members on this side of the aisle to address many of the 
concerns that have existed with regard to this legislation. This 
Manager's amendment, while maybe still not perfect, represents a 
noticeable improvement over the version of the bill, as it was 
originally introduced.
    First, it narrows the circumstances under which the chief judge of 
a federal judicial district may toll or delay deadlines to those 
involving a natural disaster or emergency.
    Second, and equally important, it includes clarifying language 
which makes it clear that this bill is not to be construed to authorize 
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus.
    Third, it limits the amount of time that a chief judge may extend 
or toll a deadline to no more than 14 days, except where a judge 
determines that an emergency situation requires additional extensions.
    Finally, for any court that decides to toll or delay a deadline, 
the amendment creates a notice requirement. Under this requirement, a 
court would have to:

        (1)  make all reasonable efforts to publicize the order--
        including announcing the order on the web sites of all affected 
        courts and the web site of the Federal Judiciary; and

        (2)  The Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts 
        must send notice, including reasons for the issuance, to the 
        House and Senate Judiciary Committees.

    This latter provision will go along way towards helping our 
committee conduct adequate oversight and assist in our efforts to 
detect any possible abuses.

    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Are there amendments? And the Chair 
recognizes himself to offer an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, which the clerk will report.
    The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 
3729, offered by Chairman Sensenbrenner. Strike all after the--
--
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Without objection, the amendment is 
considered as read.
    [The amendment in the nature of a substitute follows:]
    
    
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Chair recognizes himself for 5 
minutes.
    This bipartisan substitute makes a number of clarifying 
changes to reflect the recommendations of the Administrative 
Office of the U.S. Courts and the Department of Justice. The 
substitute would reduce the authority of a Federal judge to 
toll deadlines during emergency situations. The amendment also 
includes an express provision that the authority of this bill 
does not extend to any statute of limitation for a criminal or 
civil action if the claim arises under the laws of a State and 
extending limitations would be inconsistent with governing 
State law. This provision was added in order to ensure that the 
bill does not violate the Erie Doctrine, which preserves the 
primacy of State law.
    Additionally, the substitute expressly provides that the 
legislation not be construed to authorize the suspension of 
habeas corpus and places a limitation, 14-day limitation, on 
the amount of time a deadline may be extended or tolled while 
preserving the ability of a judge to seek additional 
extensions.
    Finally, the substitute requires a court issuing an order 
to toll or delay deadlines to make all reasonable efforts to 
publicize the order on the websites of the Federal judiciary 
and all affected courts and also to notify our Committee and 
the wise people over on the other side who serve on the 
Judiciary Committee when such an action is taken.
    I urge the Members to support the substitute, and----
    Mr. Watt. Would the Chairman yield for----
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. I yield to the gentleman from North 
Carolina.
    Mr. Watt. I was quickly trying to read the substitute. I 
had read the original bill and thought that we were proceeding 
on that. Does this require an application of any kind, or it's 
just the initiative of the judge? The original bill gave the 
Attorney General but not litigants the right to apply to 
trigger, but I don't see a triggering mechanism here either 
one, either the Attorney General or private litigants.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. If the gentleman--reclaiming my 
time, it is my belief that the judge can do this on his own 
with the, you know, appropriate notice on the website. I 
imagine that if there are extenuating circumstances, any of the 
litigants, including the Attorney General, should the United 
States be a party, can make an application, in which case it 
would be up to the judge on whether or not to grant the 
application or deny it.
    Mr. Watt. That's fine, Mr. Chairman. The concern I had 
about the original bill was that it seemed to give the Attorney 
General the right to apply, not litigants. But I think you've 
solved that, and I'll yield back.
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. The Chair yields back his time. 
Without objection, all Members may include opening statements 
in the record at this point.
    Are there any second degree amendments to the amendment in 
the nature of a substitute?
    [No response.]
    Chairman Sensenbrenner. Hearing no amendments, the question 
occurs on the amendment in the nature of the substitute offered 
by the Chair. All those in favor will say aye? Opposed, no?
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it, and the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute is agreed to. A 
reporting quorum is present.
    The question occurs on the motion to report the bill H.R. 
3729 favorably as amended. All those in favor will say aye? 
Opposed, no?
    The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it. The motion to 
report favorably is agreed to.
    Without objection, the bill will be reported favorably to 
the House in the form of a single amendment in the nature of a 
substitute incorporating the amendments adopted here today. 
Without objection, the staff is directed to make any technical 
and conforming changes, and all Members will be given 2 days as 
provided by the rules in which to submit additional, 
dissenting, supplemental, or minority views.
    This concludes the business for which this markup was 
called. The Chair thanks everybody for dealing with these 
matters expeditiously, and without objection, the Committee 
stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:37 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                  
