Photo credit: www.yahoo.com
In a significant move, U.S. President Joe Biden has vetoed the JUDGES Act, legislation aimed at adding 66 judges to federal courts across the country. This decision marks a notable moment in the ongoing debate about the federal judiciary, as the act represented the first potential expansion of court judges since 1990, and had initially garnered substantial bipartisan support.
The proposed JUDGES Act sought to alleviate pressure on federal trial courts by increasing the number of judges in 25 district courts spanning 13 states, which included populous areas such as California, Florida, and Texas. The plan involved a phased implementation of new judgeships every two years until 2035.
In a rare public endorsement of the legislation, judges from both major political parties expressed their support, citing a more than 30% rise in federal case loads since Congress last addressed court staffing comprehensively. Despite this, Biden chose to uphold a veto threat made shortly before the bill’s passage by the Republican-led House of Representatives, which voted 236-173 in favor.
In his formal rejection letter to the Senate, Biden argued that the legislation was rushed and did not adequately consider whether there was a genuine need for more judges or how these new positions would be distributed across the country.
Senator Todd Young, a Republican from Indiana and the bill’s Senate sponsor, described the veto as an example of “partisan politics at its worst.” To address concerns over politicization of judicial appointments, the bill was designed to stagger the new judgeships over three presidential terms, intending to minimize the risk of creating vacancies that could be filled by an incoming president from the opposing party.
The Senate, which was under Democratic control, approved the bill unanimously in August. However, it languished in the House until after the November elections, when Republican President-elect Donald Trump was poised to appoint the first cohort of judges.
This delay led to criticism from some Democrats, who accused Republicans of undermining a key aspect of the legislation by pushing for a vote when the nature of Trump’s upcoming judicial appointments was unclear.
Had the bill been enacted, Trump would have gained the ability to appoint 22 permanent and three temporary judges during his administration, in addition to the significant number of judicial appointments he had already made. With 234 judicial picks during his first term—including three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court—Trump has significantly influenced the judiciary, consolidating a conservative majority.
In contrast, Biden has already surpassed Trump’s total with 235 judicial appointments, although his selections have included fewer appellate judges and just one Supreme Court justice during his time in office.
Source
www.yahoo.com