[House Report 119-240]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 119-240
=======================================================================
COURTHOUSE AFFORDABILITY AND SPACE EFFICIENCY
(CASE) ACT OF 2025
----------------
September 8, 2025.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
----------------
Mr. Graves, from the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 3426]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, to whom
was referred the bill (H.R. 3426) to amend title 40, United
States Code, to limit the construction of new courthouses under
certain circumstances, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose of Legislation........................................... 2
Background and Need for Legislation.............................. 2
Hearings......................................................... 4
Legislative History and Consideration............................ 4
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations................. 4
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................ 5
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................ 5
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 7
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 7
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff
Benefits....................................................... 7
Federal Mandates Statement....................................... 7
Preemption Clarification......................................... 7
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 7
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 7
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 8
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 8
Purpose of Legislation
The purpose of H.R. 3426, the Courthouse Affordability and
Space Efficiency (CASE) Act of 2025, is to amend title 40,
United States Code, to limit the construction of new
courthouses under certain circumstances, and for other
purposes.
Background and Need for Legislation
Federal courthouses are constructed, owned, and managed by
the General Services Administration (GSA) and funded through
GSA's Federal Buildings Fund.\1\ The Committee has conducted
ongoing oversight of the Federal courthouse construction
program. In 2010, at the request of the Committee, the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) completed a study
entitled, ``Federal Courthouse Construction: Better Planning,
Oversight, and Courtroom Sharing Needed to Address Future
Costs.''\2\ In the report, GAO examined 33 courthouses that
were constructed during the ten-year period from 2000 to
2010.\3\ GAO found that 3.56 million square feet of extra space
was built costing the taxpayer more than $800 million because
of the following reasons:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\General Serv. Admin., Courthouse Construction (last updated Nov.
8, 2023), available at https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/gsa-properties/
courthouse-program/courthouse-construction; 40 U.S.C. Sec. 3301.
\2\U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-10-417, Federal Courthouse
Construction: Better Planning, Oversight, and Courtroom Sharing Needed
to Address Future Costs (June 2010) [hereinafter GAO Report 2010],
available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-10-417.pdf.
\3\Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Judiciary grossly overestimated its ten-
year projection of future judges assigned to
courthouses;
New courthouses did not incorporate
courtroom sharing; and
GSA constructed courthouses above the
Congressionally-approved size.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\Id. at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A primary reason for the overbuilding of courthouses has
been the Judiciary's inaccurate ten-year projections for future
judgeships.\5\ Since courthouses are designed to house judges
and their staff, the overall size of a courthouse is largely
determined by the number of judges expected to be housed in the
building and whether judges will share courtrooms.\6\ However,
even as far back as 1993, GAO questioned the basis on which the
United States Courts calculated their projections for new
judges.\7\ In particular, at that time, the courts based their
calculations on a caseload projection method.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Id.
\6\Id. at 6-8.
\7\U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GGD-93-132, Federal Judiciary
Space: Long-Range Planning Process Needs Revision (Sept. 1993),
available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/ggd-93-132.pdf.
\8\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another reason for overbuilding was the lack of courtroom
sharing. To conduct their report in 2010, GAO created a model
for courtroom sharing that showed significant amounts of
unscheduled time in courtrooms, illustrating sharing of
courtrooms could be significantly higher than practiced and
this was based on data produced by the Federal Judicial Center
(FJC)--the research arm of the Judicial Conference of the
United States.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\GAO Report 2010, supra note 2, at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress has questioned the need for every judge to have a
courtroom, particularly in the case of a large courthouse with
20 or more courtrooms.\10\ Despite this, the United States
Courts have consistently requested a courtroom for every active
judge.\11\ In 2019, the Judicial Conference updated policies
with respect to Senior District Judges, Magistrate Judges, and
Bankruptcy Judges sharing courtrooms.\12\ However, the new
courtroom sharing policy was only implemented for courthouses
that are renovated or newly constructed, it does not impact
existing courthouses.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\L.A. Courthouse: GSA's Plan to Spend $400 Million to Create
Vacant Space: Hearing before the H. Comm. on Transp. & Infrastructure,
112th Cong. (Aug. 17, 2012), available at https://www.govinfo.gov/
content/pkg/CHRG-112hhrg75572/pdf/CHRG-112hhrg75572.pdf.
\11\Id.
\12\United States Courts, U.S. Courts Design Guide (last updated
Mar. 2021) [hereinafter Design Guide], available at https://
www.uscourts.gov/administration-policies/judiciary-policies/us-courts-
design-guide.
\13\Id. at 2-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of these findings, the Committee halted
approving new courthouse construction until the Judiciary
revamped its process for proposing new courthouses, including
revising judgeship projections and instituting courtroom
sharing policies.\14\ Following this, the Judiciary
subsequently updated its Asset Management Planning (AMP)
process that improved and standardized its method of reviewing
the need for new courthouses yet the AMP process continues to
give greater weight to number of courtrooms/chambers (50
percent of the weighted AMP system) than building condition (12
percent) or security (10 percent) in determining the ``Urgency
Evaluation'' Rating or UE and need for a new courthouse.\15\
While the Judiciary has refined its courtroom sharing policies
for magistrate, senior, and bankruptcy judges, sharing policies
do not apply to active district court judges.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\Letter from Eleanor Holmes Norton, Chairwoman and Mario Diaz-
Balart, Ranking Member, H. Subcommittee on Econ. Dev., Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management to President Barack Obama, (Aug. 2,
2010) (On file with Comm.).
\15\Admin. Off. of the U.S. Courts, Asset Management Planning:
Process Handbook (2023), available at https://www.uscourts.gov/data-
news/reports/handbooks-manuals/asset-management-planning-process-
handbook.
\16\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the United States Courts publication of the new
Design Guide in 2021, the Committee requested that GAO examine
the judiciary's rationale for the changes that were made in the
new Design Guide.\17\ The report, ``Federal Courthouse
Construction: New Design Standards Will Result in Significant
Size and Cost Increases,'' studied the extent to which these
changes could affect the size and cost of courthouse
projects.\18\ To conduct this study, GAO examined six recently
constructed courthouses that used the 2007 Design Guide, since
no courthouses have been constructed using the 2021 Design
Guide.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-25-106724, Federal
Courthouse Construction: New Design Standards Will Result in
Significant Size and Cost Increases at 1 (2024) [hereinafter GAO Report
2024], available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-25-106724.pdf.
\18\Id. at 2.
\19\Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report found that, had the 2021 Design Guide
requirements been used for the construction of those six
courthouse projects, the size of the courthouses would have
increased by almost six percent and construction costs would
have increased by approximately twelve percent.\20\ GAO largely
attributes these increases in size and cost, to the increase in
judiciary circulation requirements (i.e., the amount of space
required for movement of the public, court staff, and
prisoners).\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\Id. at 29.
\21\Id. at 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 3426 limits the scope of what GSA is authorized to
construct for Federal courthouses. The bill codifies the
sharing requirements for bankruptcy, senior and magistrate
judges and, for larger courthouses with 10 or more active
district judges, limits the number of courtrooms to two for
every three judges.
Hearings
For the purposes of rule XIII, clause 3(c)(6)(A) of the
119th Congress, the following hearing was used to develop or
consider H.R. 3426:
On May 20, 2025, the Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure held a hearing entitled,
``Federal Courthouse Design and Construction: Examining the
Costs to the Taxpayer.'' The Subcommittee received testimony
from Mr. David Marroni, Acting Director, Physical
Infrastructure, Government Accountability Office (GAO); The
Honorable Glenn T. Suddaby, District Judge for the United
States District Court for the Northern District of New York and
Chair, Judicial Conference Committee on Space and Facilities;
and Mr. Michael Peters, Commissioner, Public Buildings Service,
General Services Administration.
Legislative History and Consideration
H.R. 3426 was introduced in the United States House of
Representatives on May 15, 2025, by Mr. Shreve of Indiana and
referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Within the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, H.R.
3426 was referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management. The Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management was discharged from further consideration of H.R.
3426 on June 11, 2025.
The Committee considered H.R. 3426 on June 11, 2025, and
ordered the measure to be reported to the House with a
favorable recommendation, without amendment, by voice vote.
Committee Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires each committee report to include the
total number of votes cast for and against on each record vote
on a motion to report and on any amendment offered to the
measure or matter, and the names of those members voting for
and against.
No record votes were requested during consideration of H.R.
3426.
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(1) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in this report.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives does not apply where a cost estimate and
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974 has been timely submitted prior to the filing of the
report and is included in the report. Such a cost estimate is
included in this report.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(3) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has
received the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3426 from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
Legislation Considered Under Suspension of the Rules
The Majority Leader of the House of Representatives
announces bills that will be considered under suspension of the
rules in that chamber. Under suspension, floor debate is
limited, all floor amendments are prohibited, points of order
against the bill are waived, and final passage requires a two-
thirds majority vote.
At the request of the Majority Leader and the House
Committee on the Budget, CBO estimates the effects of those
bills on direct spending and revenues. CBO has limited time to
review the legislation before consideration. Although it is
possible in most cases to determine whether the legislation
would affect direct spending or revenues, time may be
insufficient to estimate the magnitude of those effects. If CBO
has prepared estimates for similar or identical legislation, a
more detailed assessment of budgetary effects, including
effects on spending subject to appropriation, may be included.
EFFECTS ON DIRECT SPENDING AND REVENUES OF LEGISLATION CONSIDERED UNDER SUSPENSION OF THE RULES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
[Week of September 8, 2025]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional
information on Suspension bill
Bill number Title Effect on direct Effect on direct spending Link to published text at
spending revenues and revenue estimates docs.house.gov
effects
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 2591....................... Mental Health in None.............. None.............. .................. https:// https://
Aviation Act of www.cbo.gov/ docs.house.gov/
2025, as amended. publication/61623. billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%202591.pdf
H.R. 3055....................... TRANSPORT Jobs None.............. None.............. .................. .................. https://
Act, as amended. docs.house.gov/
billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%203055.pdf
H.R. 3423....................... FROST Act, as Increase by Less None.............. .................. https:// https://
amended. Than $500K. www.cbo.gov/ docs.house.gov/
publication/61630. billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%203423.pdf
H.R. 3424....................... SPACE Act of 2025. None.............. None.............. .................. .................. https://
docs.house.gov/
billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%203424.pdf
H.R. 3425....................... POST Act of 2025, None.............. None.............. .................. .................. https://
as amended. docs.house.gov/
billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%203425.pdf
H.R. 3426....................... CASE Act, as None.............. None.............. .................. .................. https://
amended. docs.house.gov/
billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%203426%20 Amen
ded.pdf
H.R. 3428....................... Mid-Atlantic River None.............. None.............. .................. .................. https://
Basin Commissions docs.house.gov/
Review Act. billsthisweek/
20250908/
HR%203428.pdf
H.R. 4550....................... United States Reduce by Less None.............. .................. https:// https://
Grain Standards Than $500K. www.cbo.gov/ docs.house.gov/
Reauthorization publication/61725. billsthisweek/
Act of 2025. 20250908/
HR%204550.pdf
H. Res.......................... Honoring the None.............. None.............. .................. .................. https://
victims and docs.house.gov/
survivors of the billsthisweek/
mass shooting at 20250908/
Annunciation MN%20Res.pdf
Catholic Church
and School in
Minneapolis,
Minnesota.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Congressional Budget Office.
Performance Goals and Objectives
With respect to the requirement of clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
performance goal and objective of this legislation is to amend
title 40, United States Code, to limit the construction of new
courthouses under certain circumstances, and for other
purposes.
Duplication of Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that no provision
of H.R. 3426 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the
Federal government known to be duplicative of another Federal
program, a program that was included in any report from the
Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to
section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a
program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance.
Congressional Earmarks, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited
Tariff Benefits
In compliance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, this bill, as reported, contains no
Congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of the rule
XXI.
Federal Mandates Statement
The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (Public Law 104-4).
Preemption Clarification
Section 423 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974
requires the report of any Committee on a bill or joint
resolution to include a statement on the extent to which the
bill or joint resolution is intended to preempt state, local,
or tribal law. The Committee finds that H.R. 3426 does not
preempt any state, local, or tribal law.
Advisory Committee Statement
No advisory committees within the definition of Section
5(b) of the appendix to Title 5, United States Code, are
created by this legislation.
Applicability to Legislative Branch
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law
104-1).
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation
Section 1. Short title
This section requires cites the bill as ``Courthouse
Affordability and Space Efficiency (CASE) Act of 2025''.
Section 2. Reducing costs related to courthouses
This section restricts GSA from constructing new
courthouses that fail to comply at a minimum with courtroom
sharing requirements defined as one courtroom per every two
bankruptcy, magistrate and senior judges and, for courthouses
with 10 or more active district judges, two courtrooms per
every three active district judges.
This section also directs that the United States Courts
Design Guide is updated within 180 days of enactment to reflect
the requirements of the bill. This section further requires GSA
to relinquish space in the same courthouse complex if a new
courthouse will add capacity in the inventory.
This section further requires GSA to submit a report to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and Committee on Environment and Public Works
of the Senate describing the revisions made to the process.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
As reported by the Committee, H.R. 3426 makes the following
changes to law:
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 40, UNITED STATES CODE
* * * * * * *
SUBTITLE II--PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND WORKS
* * * * * * *
PART A--GENERAL
* * * * * * *
CHAPTER 33--ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, AND ALTERATION
Sec.
3301. Definitions and nonapplication.
* * * * * * *
3320. Reducing costs related to courthouses.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 3320. Reducing costs related to courthouses
(a) Limitation on New Courthouses.--The Administrator of
General Services may not commence construction of any new
courthouse if--
(1) construction has not begun on or before the date
of enactment of this section; and
(2) the design and construction of the new courthouse
fails to comply, at a minimum, with the courtroom
sharing requirements described in subsection (b).
(b) Courtroom Sharing Requirements Defined.--The term
``courtroom sharing requirements'' means--
(1) in courthouses with 10 or more active district
judges, 2 courtrooms per 3 active district judges,
except such courthouses may contain not less than 9
courtrooms for active district judges;
(2) in courthouses with 3 or more bankruptcy judges,
1 courtroom per 2 bankruptcy judges;
(3) in courthouses with 3 or more senior district
judges, 1 courtroom per 2 senior district judges; and
(4) in courthouses with 3 or more magistrate judges,
1 courtroom per 2 magistrate judges.
(c) United States Courts Design Guide.--Not later than 180
days after the date of enactment of this section, the Design
Guide for courthouses shall be updated to incorporate courtroom
sharing requirements to the maximum extent practicable.
(d) Utilization.--If a new courthouse will add capacity in
the inventory of the General Services Administration, existing
space in the same courthouse complex must be fully utilized or
relinquished from the inventory of the General Services
Administration.
* * * * * * *
[all]