The federal judiciary has not had a substantial pay raise since 1991, but on January 31, 2008 the Senate Judiciary Committee marked up and approved the Federal Judicial Salary Restoration Act of 2007 (S. 1638) by a vote of ten to seven. Notably, the mark up included an amendment by Senator Feingold (D- WI) to limit judicial gifts related to attendance at privately-funded educations trips and seminars (Feingold Amendment). The next stop would be the Senate floor, but sources say the addition of the Feingold Amendment could doom final passage.
Senator Leahy (D-VT) introduced S. 1638 on June 15, 2007. Other original cosponsoring senators were Hatch (R-UT), Reid (D-NV), McConnell (R-KY), Feinstein (D-CA) and Graham (R-SC), and the bill now has an additional 14 sponsors. If passed, S. 1638 would increase judges’ salaries by 29%, particularly increasing the salaries of judges of the district courts from $169,300 to $247,800. By statute, the salaries of bankruptcy judges are set at 92% of those of district court judges, so their salaries would increase from approximately $155,000 to $227,000. S. 1638 would also increase the salaries of judges of the courts of appeals to $262,700, the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court to $304,500 and the Chief Justice of the United States to $318,200. This would be the largest pay raise in 20 years. Since 1991 the judiciary has received cost-of-living increases, but only during some of the years. In the House, a straight pay raise bill (H.R. 3753) passed the House Judiciary Committee by 28-5 in December.
The Feingold Amendment would prohibit a federal judge from accepting gifts valued at greater than $2000 in connection with a single trip or event. What would constitute such a “gift” would be governed by the Regulations of the Judicial Conference of the United States under Title III of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 Concerning Gifts, and would include items such as travel expenses for transportation, food and lodging, as well as any outside-earned income. The aggregate limit of such allowable gifts in a single year would be $20,000. Further, the Feingold Amendment would prohibit a federal judge from accepting any gifts in connection with attending, as a speaker or participant, any program with the significant purpose of educating federal or state judges. Sources excepted from these prohibitions would be the federal government, a state or local government, a federal bar association, a state or local bar association, a subject-matter bar association, a judicial association, the Judicial Division of the American Bar Association and the National Judicial College. The Feingold Amendment would allow for annual CPI increases in the amounts. The Feingold Amendment passed on a straight party-line vote. In addition to Republican opposition, the U.S. Judicial Conference prefers its own ethical safeguards, which were added in late 2006 to provide more transparency and disclosure of funded judicial travel.
ABI announced its support for S. 1638, as introduced, on July 31, 2007. While ABI is a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization that does not maintain a legislative advocacy agenda, it has consistently supported legislation that advances the administration of justice in the bankruptcy system. Thus, ABI sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee last summer endorsing S. 1638, stating that the bill met the organization’s criteria for support given the serious problem that the loss of experienced judges poses to the bankruptcy system. “The rights of millions of employees, retirees and other stakeholders are at issue in theses cases, and so retaining and attracting the top members of the legal profession is vital to the administration of the bankruptcy system,” ABI Chairman John D. Penn wrote in the letter. “The bankruptcy courts have lost some of our most experienced and skilled judges because judicial salaries have eroded so dramatically from what is available in private practice.” To view the full press release, click here: http://www.abiworld.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=48135
ABI is not alone in its support of S. 1638. Chief Justice Roberts has been very vocal in his support. He has renewed his call this year, noting that some federal judges make about the same as first-year lawyers now do at firms in major cities, which is reported to be at least $160,000. In 2007 Chief Justice Roberts stated that over 38 judges have left the federal bench due to the salary issue, and he projected that 68 judges will have left by 2009. A study issued by the Congressional Research Service in December, however, says there is no “conclusive relationship” between the salary issue and judges leaving or not pursuing the bench. To view the full report, please click here: http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34281_20080110.pdf. Bankruptcy judge Thomas Bennett, from Birmingham, Alabama, has taken issue with this report, voicing his opinion that fewer private-sector attorneys pursue the bench today because of the salary issue. Judge Bennett is the current president of the National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges.