Origanalist
01-02-2014, 08:48 AM
http://images.politico.com/global/2012/06/120626_john_roberts_ap_3281.jpg
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts used his year-end report for 2013 to call for more funding for federal courts and lambaste sequestration’s effect on the judiciary.
In the New Year’s Eve missive, Roberts referenced the seasonally appropriate “A Christmas Carol” by Charles Dickens to guide a “look at what has made our federal court system work in the past, what we are doing in the present to preserve it in an era of fiscal constraint, and what the future holds if the judiciary does not receive the funding it needs.”
Roberts wrote that while the judiciary recognizes the need for frugality, its operating costs are only 0.2 percent of the federal budget and it has been making austerity moves for years, even before the sequester went into effect. Because courts cannot manage their caseload, however, Roberts said the effects of sequestration hit them harder.
“The impact of the sequester was more significant on the courts than elsewhere in the government, because virtually all of their core functions are constitutionally and statutorily required,” Roberts wrote. “Unlike most Executive Branch agencies, the courts do not have discretionary programs they can eliminate or postpone in response to budget cuts.”
The chief justice also went through the appropriations request submitted by the judiciary to Congress, saying it was conservative and the minimum needed for the courts to operate properly.
“In the coming weeks, and into the future, I encourage the president and Congress to be attentive to the needs of the Judicial Branch and avert the adverse consequences that would result from funding the judiciary below its minimal needs,” Roberts wrote. “It takes no imagination to see that failing to meet the judiciary’s essential requirements undermines the public’s confidence in all three branches of government. Both ‘A Christmas Carol’ and ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ have happy endings. We are encouraged that the story of funding for the federal judiciary — though perhaps not as gripping a tale — will too.”
The Supreme Court justices and federal judges have not been shy in advocating for court funding under sequestration. The chief judges of 87 district courts wrote to Congress last August pleading for more money and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer made a rare appearance before a congressional hearing last March to make the case, as well.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/roberts-calls-for-more-money-for-courts-101656.html#ixzz2pFjN5D8l
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts used his year-end report for 2013 to call for more funding for federal courts and lambaste sequestration’s effect on the judiciary.
In the New Year’s Eve missive, Roberts referenced the seasonally appropriate “A Christmas Carol” by Charles Dickens to guide a “look at what has made our federal court system work in the past, what we are doing in the present to preserve it in an era of fiscal constraint, and what the future holds if the judiciary does not receive the funding it needs.”
Roberts wrote that while the judiciary recognizes the need for frugality, its operating costs are only 0.2 percent of the federal budget and it has been making austerity moves for years, even before the sequester went into effect. Because courts cannot manage their caseload, however, Roberts said the effects of sequestration hit them harder.
“The impact of the sequester was more significant on the courts than elsewhere in the government, because virtually all of their core functions are constitutionally and statutorily required,” Roberts wrote. “Unlike most Executive Branch agencies, the courts do not have discretionary programs they can eliminate or postpone in response to budget cuts.”
The chief justice also went through the appropriations request submitted by the judiciary to Congress, saying it was conservative and the minimum needed for the courts to operate properly.
“In the coming weeks, and into the future, I encourage the president and Congress to be attentive to the needs of the Judicial Branch and avert the adverse consequences that would result from funding the judiciary below its minimal needs,” Roberts wrote. “It takes no imagination to see that failing to meet the judiciary’s essential requirements undermines the public’s confidence in all three branches of government. Both ‘A Christmas Carol’ and ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ have happy endings. We are encouraged that the story of funding for the federal judiciary — though perhaps not as gripping a tale — will too.”
The Supreme Court justices and federal judges have not been shy in advocating for court funding under sequestration. The chief judges of 87 district courts wrote to Congress last August pleading for more money and Justices Anthony Kennedy and Stephen Breyer made a rare appearance before a congressional hearing last March to make the case, as well.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/roberts-calls-for-more-money-for-courts-101656.html#ixzz2pFjN5D8l