On Wednesday, the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee held an oversight hearing on the federal judiciary.
Category
đź—ž
NewsTranscript
00:00:00You combined represent over 60 years of federal civil service, and we are grateful for your time.
00:00:05Special congratulations to you, Judge Conrad, on your recent retirement from district court work in North Carolina.
00:00:11As a former prosecutor, I know the American judicial system is the gold standard for fair, equal, and impartial treatment under the law.
00:00:19It is a critical part of our democracy and has been since our nation's founding almost 250 years ago.
00:00:24It is incumbent upon us to ensure that our partner branches of government have the tools they need to execute the duties of their office.
00:00:31Courthouses across the United States serve not only as a place of employment, but as a symbol of what makes our country great.
00:00:40But many of the courthouses need repair to keep pace with modern times.
00:00:44At the same time, the judicial system faces the reality of modern threats to both its physical and cybersecurity.
00:00:50Protests across the country have damaged federal property and threaten the safety and security of judges, officers, and staff who work every day to serve the American people.
00:01:00Countries like China and Russia focus their efforts on gaining access to the IT systems of the judiciary to undermine American democracy at its core.
00:01:07And now federal judges find their names in the news or on social media, and they are met with online vulgarity, and in some cases, physical harm to them or their loved ones.
00:01:17As the judiciary's fiscal year 2026 spending plan reveals, it takes significant resources to operate the federal judiciary.
00:01:24We need to understand their priorities and resources, how they're being deployed across its divisions, and why.
00:01:31Judge St. Eve and Judge Conrad, let me again commend you on your leadership during these unique and challenging times.
00:01:37I look forward to working with you.
00:01:39I now recognize the ranking member for his opening statement.
00:01:42Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
00:01:46I want to thank Judge Conrad and Judge St. Eve for being with us and for the meeting we have, which was very helpful as a preface to this hearing.
00:01:55If the judiciary, Mr. Chairman, is to meet this pivotal moment and preserve the rule of law, we must ensure that it has the resources and independence it needs to function as a co-equal branch of government.
00:02:09That's why I'm very disturbed to see certain House Republicans call for retaliation against judges who rule on the law as they see it, but with which the present administration may disagree.
00:02:22Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan sent a letter asking this committee to limit funding the judiciary uses to issue and enforce injunctions.
00:02:33Other House Republicans have filed articles of impeachment against judges, not for any misconduct, but rather for ruling against the administration.
00:02:42Federal judges who block Trump's illegal executive actions are just trying to do their jobs and interpreting the law.
00:02:50That is their role, and that is critical to our democracy.
00:02:55Many were appointed by Republican presidents.
00:02:57Some were even appointed by Donald Trump himself.
00:02:59I agree with Chief Justice Roberts' assessment earlier this week that retaliation against them has, to use his words, endangered the rule of law.
00:03:15You can't claim to stand for law and order when you threaten the independence of the branch responsible for upholding law and order.
00:03:23Some of my colleagues across the aisle agree, and I hope they'll stand up for the judiciary.
00:03:29Our subcommittee needs to ensure our courts receive the resources they need to fulfill their duties under the Constitution.
00:03:36Doing so is especially important, considering the recent continuing resolution did not provide any funding increase for the judiciary in fiscal year 2025.
00:03:47Six of the 11 judicial branch appropriations were funded at a freeze for a second year.
00:03:52Meaning they were forced to continue operating at fiscal year 23 levels.
00:03:59For fiscal year 26, judiciary requested a $9.4 billion in discretionary funding.
00:04:04An increase of $800 million, or 9.3% over the 25 continuing resolution.
00:04:11Most of that increase, however, some 68%, is just to offset inflation, while the rest is for programmatic reassessment.
00:04:22Failing to fulfill that request would threaten the judiciary's ability to perform basic constitutional and statutory functions.
00:04:31I'm particularly concerned, Mr. Chairman, about our Federal Public Defender Program,
00:04:38which has faced a severe staffing shortage and budget shortfall for years.
00:04:45As a matter of fact, we made a mistake in this committee, and the Senate made a further mistake, which was corrected,
00:04:54which would have completely undermined the ability to perform the public defender service as is necessary.
00:05:02The judiciary has requested $1.77 billion for defender services,
00:05:06an increase, a substantial increase, of $315 million, or 22%, over the fiscal year 25 CR.
00:05:15Again, a freeze at 23 levels.
00:05:18Without that funding, courts will struggle to ensure that Americans are provided their constitutional right to an attorney,
00:05:30a competent attorney.
00:05:31We also need to ensure that our courts can keep up with the increasing caseloads.
00:05:36That means following through on the request to increase funding for the Court of Appeals and District Courts by $345 million, or 6%,
00:05:44and again, for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, by $8 million, or 8%, over the 25 CR.
00:05:52Again, we're talking about 73 levels, essentially.
00:05:54Without these increases to help our courts here hire staff as needed and cover basic operational costs,
00:06:03case backlogs will only continue to grow, making it harder for Americans to receive timely justice and due process.
00:06:13I know all the committee members understand this, but criminal cases must become before the civil cases
00:06:20because of the right to a speedy trial.
00:06:24That means small businesses and other Americans will be pushed to later resolution of their cases.
00:06:32We also need to devote more resources to keep our judges and courts safe
00:06:36at the time when Donald Trump and his allies are vilifying our courts.
00:06:42The public hears that, and it has a tendency to inflame those who may be irrational, may be mentally ill, or just may be angry.
00:06:55We ought to fulfill its request for a $142 million, or a 19% increase, above the 25 CR for court security.
00:07:05Now, court security is a euphemism for making sure our judges are safe,
00:07:10making sure that our judges are not intimidated,
00:07:13making sure that justice will be served unrelated to the threat of violence.
00:07:19I look forward to hearing more from Judge Conrad and Judge St. Eve,
00:07:24although I want to say to you I'm going to go back to my other hearing, going back and forth.
00:07:29But my staff will be here, and I'm going to hear everything you say,
00:07:34but it may be virtually.
00:07:36Everyone who stands for law and order, Mr. Chairman,
00:07:41ought to be united in the mission of ensuring that our judiciary is safe, neutral,
00:07:49and articulating their thoughts regarding and opinions with reference to the law
00:07:58unrelated to intimidation and forces beyond their control.
00:08:04I yield back.
00:08:05Thank you, Mr. Hoyer.
00:08:07Today, we welcome the testimony of the Honorable Amy St. Eve,
00:08:12Chair of the Budget Committee for the Judicial Conference of the United States,
00:08:17and dear friend of Magistrate Jonathan Greenberg,
00:08:20and the Honorable Robert J. Conrad, Jr.,
00:08:22Secretary of the Judicial Conference of the United States.
00:08:26Without objection, your full written testimony will be entered into the record.
00:08:30With that in mind, we ask you to please summarize your opening statement in five minutes.
00:08:33Judge St. Eve, you are recognized for five minutes.
00:08:36Good morning.
00:08:37Chairman Joyce, Ranking Member Hoyer, and members of the subcommittee,
00:08:41my name is Amy St. Eve, and I'm a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.
00:08:47On behalf of the Judicial Conference Committee on the budget, which I chair,
00:08:51I am pleased to appear before you today to present and explain the fiscal year 2026 budget request of the federal judiciary.
00:09:01Thank you for the opportunity to do so.
00:09:04An effective, efficient, and independent judiciary is foundational to the system of our government.
00:09:10Adequate and consistent funding is absolutely critical to conduct our constitutional and statutory responsibilities,
00:09:19and we are reliant on this subcommittee to help ensure that those resources are in place for us.
00:09:26The branch's fiscal year 2026 funding request must be looked at in the context of the recently enacted continuing resolution
00:09:35for fiscal year 25, where every component of the branch was held to its fiscal year 24 enacted funding levels,
00:09:45regardless of any change in workload or other requirements.
00:09:49And for most of our accounts, this is the second straight year of a hard freeze.
00:09:56Among the impacts of the full year CR are the deferral of dozens of judicial security projects
00:10:03at a time when threats against judges are increasing.
00:10:07The suspension of more than two months of payments to private attorneys
00:10:11who have provided constitutionally required representation to indigent defendants.
00:10:17The continuation of a long hiring freeze in federal defender organizations
00:10:23and a year-over-year reduction in the allotments made to courts and probation and pretrial services offices
00:10:30to serve and protect your constituents.
00:10:33While the judiciary's fiscal year 26 request of $9.4 billion may seem large,
00:10:41these resources are needed to rebuild and restore critical functions of the courts
00:10:47and the federal defenders that were not sufficiently funded in either fiscal year 24 or 25
00:10:53and to address new and potentially significant workload increases
00:10:57based on the law enforcement initiatives of the executive branch.
00:11:03Our request includes $6.9 billion for the courts and probation and pretrial services offices.
00:11:09More than 85% of this requested increase in this area reflects just standard adjustments
00:11:17to maintain current services, with the remainder funding critical new investments
00:11:23in staffing, space and physical infrastructure, and information technology,
00:11:29including the next installment of funds that is essential for our multi-year cybersecurity
00:11:35and IT modernization plan.
00:11:38The defender services request totals $1.8 billion.
00:11:43Well over half of the requested increase in this account is needed just to mitigate the effects
00:11:49of the suspension of payments to private attorneys that was necessitated by fiscal year 25
00:11:56by the full CR.
00:11:57The remainder will support current service levels and allow a resumption of hiring
00:12:02in the federal defender offices.
00:12:05We are also requesting almost $900 million for our court security program
00:12:10to address a complex and evolving threat environment facing judges
00:12:15and the judicial process overall.
00:12:17The request fully funds contractual obligations to our court security officers
00:12:23and helps recapitalize our systems and equipment budget, which was slashed due to two straight years
00:12:30of funding freezes in this account.
00:12:33The request also continues the expansion of our vulnerability management program,
00:12:39which was instituted to improve the safety of judges and their families
00:12:43after the murder of the son of Judge Esther Salas and the critical wounding of her husband in 2020.
00:12:51Finally, our request includes the $19 million that we project will be needed
00:12:57to fully fund grant and pedagero requirements for the year.
00:13:02As we ask the subcommittee to make the substantial investment in the judiciary,
00:13:07I want to assure you that we take very seriously our commitment to be responsible stewards of our funds.
00:13:16My committee has an entire subcommittee that is dedicated to finding opportunities
00:13:21to achieve efficiencies, adopt innovative business practices,
00:13:25and reduce or limit our costs without negatively impacting the quality of judicial services.
00:13:33At any given time, we have numerous cost containment measures that are at various stages of implementation,
00:13:40and those are described more fully in our budget request.
00:13:44Again, thank you for the opportunity to appear today and for your support of the judiciary.
00:13:51I understand that the fiscal year 26 budget we have put forward is a large one
00:13:56and that this is a difficult budget environment,
00:13:59but it is necessary to support the fair, efficient, and secure administration of justice in this country.
00:14:06I ask that you please make a part of the record my statement
00:14:10and those provided by the Court of International Trade,
00:14:14the Federal Judicial Center, and the U.S. Sentencing Commission
00:14:17on whose behalf we submit requests.
00:14:21I would be pleased to answer your questions at this time.
00:14:23Thank you, Judge.
00:14:26Now recognized for five minutes the Honorable Judge Robert Conrad.
00:14:30Thank you, Chairman Joyce, Representative Hoyer, members Ivey, and Bob, and other members of the committee.
00:14:40My name is Bob Conrad.
00:14:42I am the Director of the Administrative Office and Secretary of the Judicial Conference of the United States.
00:14:47Before being selected to this post by the Chief Justice, I served as a United States District Judge
00:14:54in the Western District of North Carolina for nearly 20 years.
00:14:58For a second straight year in FY 2025, our court security program received flat funding.
00:15:07We are concerned about this.
00:15:09We are also concerned about the increase in threats being made against federal judges and courthouses in the last several years.
00:15:16The independence of the judicial branch is jeopardized when judges are threatened with harm or impeachment on the basis of their rulings.
00:15:26Our constitutional system depends on judges who are sworn to administer justice without respect to persons.
00:15:35In doing so, they must be free from threats and intimidation.
00:15:39This is essential not just for the safety of judges and their families,
00:15:43but also to the pursuit of justice and equal rights for all.
00:15:47Threats of reprisals and retribution erode the rule of law.
00:15:52So we have safety concerns, compounded by the consecutive years of flat funding.
00:15:59I respectfully urge the subcommittee to fully fund our FY2026 court security request.
00:16:06Second, we have in recent years discussed our need for additional resources to address a sharp increase in the number and sophistication of cyber attacks on the judiciary IT systems.
00:16:20The judiciary is a high-value target for cyber criminals.
00:16:23We have a classified briefing scheduled for next Tuesday, May 20th, to share some additional details on cyber attacks with House and Senate Appropriations Committee leadership and FSGG subcommittee leadership.
00:16:37We do require ongoing resources to secure and modernize our systems, and we ask for the subcommittee's support.
00:16:47Third, I'd like to turn to our efforts to ensure a safe and respectful workplace for all judiciary employees.
00:16:54I'm proud to chair the Federal Judiciary Workplace Conduct Working Group, created by Chief Justice Roberts in 2018.
00:17:01For seven years, this group, comprised of some of the sharpest, most experienced judges and other court leaders, have worked to accomplish the Chief Justice's directive to create an exemplary workplace.
00:17:16We have made significant improvements to our workplace conduct policies and practices.
00:17:22Last fall, we issued our first annual report on workplace conduct.
00:17:26In March of this year, we released the working group's analysis of the Federal Judicial Center's first national workplace survey of judiciary employees.
00:17:37The survey went out to 28,000 employees.
00:17:41A statistically impressive 50% responded.
00:17:4591% of respondents indicated they had not experienced wrongful conduct of any kind.
00:17:50Over 80% responded that they were proud of their work and liked their jobs, and would recommend their place of employment to family and friends.
00:17:59In addition, the survey showed us areas where we might improve, and the working group has issued additional recommendations to improve training, make reporting misconduct easier, and eliminate fear of retaliation.
00:18:13In addition, we will use the survey results to guide our efforts in making further improvements to workplace conduct policies.
00:18:21Turning to the AO budget, the FY 2025 full year CR represents a second year of flat funding at the FY 2023 level.
00:18:33Because staff salaries and benefits comprise 96% of the AO budget, the impact of funding shortfalls rests almost entirely on our ability to retain and hire staff.
00:18:48For FY 2025, we are forced to leave a number of important positions unfilled.
00:18:52The AO's FY 2026 request seeks $110.5 million, a 7.6% increase above the FY 2025 enacted level.
00:19:08The requested $7.8 million appropriations increase is comprised of $6.2 million for adjustments to base for standard budgetary increases,
00:19:18and $1.6 million to hire new staff to improve AO operations and enable us to better support the courts and federal defender organizations.
00:19:29My written statement discusses our need for new judgeships.
00:19:33Last Congress, we made the case for an additional 66 positions.
00:19:38The bill passed unanimously in the Senate and received post-election bipartisan support in the House.
00:19:45Unfortunately, it was vetoed at the last minute.
00:19:49The compelling case for new judgeships remains.
00:19:54My statement also discusses our new courthouse priorities, which are funded under GSA.
00:20:00Our top priority is a new courthouse annex in San Juan, Puerto Rico,
00:20:05which the Judicial Conference designated as a space emergency in 2020.
00:20:10I urge you to make yourself familiar with the plight of judiciary employees in Puerto Rico,
00:20:16working in trailers behind Concertino Wire, a courthouse that is outdated, unsafe, and built on a seismic fault line.
00:20:25It represents a compelling case for emergency funding, and I would ask that you heed our call.
00:20:31Our other space priorities are new courthouse projects in Hartford, Connecticut, Chattanooga, Tennessee,
00:20:38Bowling Green, Kentucky, and Anchorage, Alaska.
00:20:41All told, we seek $863 million in FY2026 for GSA for these priority projects.
00:20:50Prepare to answer the subcommittee's questions.
00:20:52Thank you, Your Honor.
00:20:56I first ran into the red, yellow, green when I worked in the federal court,
00:21:02so I know you've seen this before, but we try to make sure that everybody has a chance to answer questions.
00:21:09People will be moving in and out, so please don't let that bother you as you follow up.
00:21:13And a former defender and prosecutor myself, I understand that the publicity that sometimes comes to a judge whether they want it or not.
00:21:23They're randomly selected.
00:21:24However, technology, social media, and the 24-7 news cycle have increased the likelihood that a judge's name will be reported on all media sites.
00:21:33This now leads to an unprecedented amount of attention on an individual who is responsible for overseeing a federal case.
00:21:38Would you describe the threat environment and how it has evolved over the last decade or so with respect to federal judges?
00:21:45What is the federal judiciary doing to ensure that tragedies like the murder of Daniel and Darrell don't happen again?
00:21:54The threat environment is dynamic and complex.
00:22:00It's important and essential for us to have our court security account funded to address this.
00:22:06Not just outside of the home, but in the courthouse as well.
00:22:11There have been since 2020 a lot of attacks on courthouses and damage to courthouses.
00:22:17The court security account funds our court security officers who are really the front line officers at courthouses
00:22:26who screen individuals coming through and make sure that the judges, when they're there, are safe.
00:22:32It also funds the essential equipment at the courthouses, the screening equipment, the video equipment, the magnetometers,
00:22:41and it funds our vulnerability management program.
00:22:45The vulnerability management program is something that the courts have taken on to help get personal identifying information,
00:22:56or PII, of judges off of the internet.
00:23:00As you indicated, it's very easy to find things out, including home addresses of judges off of social media or the internet.
00:23:09And our vulnerability management program is an easy way to help judges pull that information off of the internet.
00:23:18As of April, 77% of our active federal judges have enrolled in the program and work with the specialists to help get this information off.
00:23:31In addition to the delete me program, which attempts to remove personal identification information of judges from the internet,
00:23:44and Judge St. Eve said almost 80% of judges have signed up for,
00:23:49we have taken steps to enroll judges in home intrusion detection system
00:23:56to protect them when they're at home and also are engaged in hardening projects across the country with respect to our courthouses.
00:24:09So the threat environment is real.
00:24:11It's been present for a number of years,
00:24:15and the judiciary and the United States Marshals Service takes it seriously,
00:24:20which is why we're asking for this funding.
00:24:22I can attest to the fact that bomb threats and having my home swatted
00:24:26and using the programs you're talking about didn't take my home address off
00:24:33because we still have to put it down on places like where we put in our application to run for office,
00:24:39the title of my home, and that's unfortunate.
00:24:43I understand you're going through the same problem,
00:24:45but as you realize, if this administration has made cost savings a priority across the federal government,
00:24:51how would you elaborate on the judiciary ensuring that this fiscal response
00:24:55and the activities are undertaking with cost containment in mind?
00:24:59And are there internal groups or programs to ensure that that is taking place?
00:25:05Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
00:25:07As I indicated in my opening statement,
00:25:10the Budget Committee has an entire subcommittee devoted to cost containment.
00:25:15And at any given time, we have various measures that are in place in a different place.
00:25:24Recently, one such engagement we had was to put in place a cap on spending
00:25:30that individual chambers can have on library books,
00:25:35encouraging more the use of electronic research and sharing of library materials.
00:25:41We are looking into the use of technology for detainees who are housed far away from federal courthouses
00:25:52so that probation officers and pretrial services officers and attorneys who are representing them
00:25:59don't need to travel, sometimes a significant amount of miles to go and visit with them,
00:26:05that they can do it electronically through equipment,
00:26:09and that would save quite a bit of money and time for all three of those categories.
00:26:15We are also looking at shared resources.
00:26:19My courthouse in Chicago, we have the Court of Appeals, the District Court, the Magistrate,
00:26:25and the Bankruptcy all in the same courthouse.
00:26:27So something that we recently instituted was we're sharing among the District Court,
00:26:33the Magistrates, and the Court of Appeals, HR now.
00:26:35So we've combined those.
00:26:37And we're looking at doing the same for IT.
00:26:40Other courthouses are looking at shared resources that they can engage in.
00:26:45So at any given time, we have different things in place.
00:26:49As you know, we've had the no net new in place on our space
00:26:53that courts cannot expand their space without giving up some.
00:26:57And we are focusing on space, which is quite expensive for us
00:27:01in a chunk of our budget.
00:27:03We are looking at other ways that we can save with space.
00:27:08As I said before, people are going to be moving in and out.
00:27:11I'm going to run down to a T-HUD hearing.
00:27:13The Vice Chair, Mr. Leloto, will take over at this point.
00:27:17The Chair now recognizes Mr. Ivey from Maryland.
00:27:20Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
00:27:26Glad to see my colleague is moving up to the big chair here.
00:27:33I do want to thank you all for coming in to testify.
00:27:36I certainly share the views of Mr. Hoyer with respect to the need for the increases
00:27:42for the judiciary.
00:27:45Cybersecurity, I think, in particular, is an interest of mine.
00:27:49I haven't served on the Homeland Security Committee last year.
00:27:53But personal security for judges and personnel is a big one for me, too.
00:27:58We had a state judge who was assassinated in 2023.
00:28:04He'd made a ruling earlier in the courthouse that day.
00:28:07The aggrieved party followed him home and shot him in his driveway.
00:28:12And I'm aware of the case.
00:28:16I believe there was an individual who threatened, I think it was Justice Kavanaugh, and he's being
00:28:21prosecuted currently.
00:28:22So we know these things are out there, and we know they happen on both sides.
00:28:26I happened to work on the task force last year with respect to the attempted assassination
00:28:32of then-candidate Trump.
00:28:35But I do want to say this, though.
00:28:37I think it's important for, because there are these issues on both sides and the judiciary
00:28:42and beyond, I think what we say in politics and as elected officials is very important
00:28:49for us to pay attention to.
00:28:50I do think, as Mr. Hoyer pointed out, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jordan's comments
00:28:58with respect to cutting funds to the judiciary, depending on some of your rulings, don't agree
00:29:04with that policy for sure.
00:29:05I think it impedes on separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary.
00:29:11But there are certainly others that have crossed the line.
00:29:14Ironically, I think President Trump, now President Trump, certainly falls into that category
00:29:20with some of the statements that he's made.
00:29:22I think with respect to Judge Boesburg, who's practicing here in the District of Columbia,
00:29:28or he's sitting here in the District of Columbia, calling him a troublemaker and an agitator,
00:29:33calling him a crooked judge, that he should be impeached, I thought was totally inappropriate
00:29:38and over the line.
00:29:39Talking about judges as lunatics is another one that I think is bad.
00:29:45And then with respect to Judge Chutkin, who was sitting in one of his criminal cases,
00:29:52he said this judge is the most evil person during the dependency of that case.
00:30:00And I just don't think that's the kind of language that we should be projecting into the public,
00:30:06especially in these times.
00:30:08Because we know these are polarized times politically.
00:30:12I know people have strong views out there about what's happening.
00:30:16I have strong views too, but I think it's important for us to not cross that line
00:30:20and say things that we think or should think could generate some sort of a violent response.
00:30:27And then from a legal and constitutional standpoint, the independence of the judiciary,
00:30:32I think that's critical too.
00:30:34I've got seven House Republican colleagues who filed articles of impeachment against sitting judges.
00:30:40One of the judges I mentioned a moment ago is one of those seven.
00:30:44No showing or even allegation of wrongdoing, particularly just disagreement with the rulings
00:30:50that they issued in those particular cases that happened to involve the Trump administration.
00:30:57And they certainly have a right to their own views.
00:30:59But again, I think it's important for us, not so much because that might create an issue of violence,
00:31:04but just respect for the Constitution and what it should mean when you start talking about impeaching judges.
00:31:12That's a big step.
00:31:13And I think to my colleagues here and beyond, we should be very sensitive about making those kinds of statements
00:31:20and crossing those lines.
00:31:21When I was a staffer here in the late 80s, we impeached two judges.
00:31:28And they clearly crossed the lines with respect to bribery, for example.
00:31:34And I thought impeachment was clearly merited there because under the standards set by the Constitution,
00:31:39they broke that.
00:31:40And they broke the trust of the American people.
00:31:42But throwing that term around, issuing articles of impeachment kind of willy-nilly is beneath what this institution should be doing.
00:31:54So thank you so much for the work that you all are doing.
00:31:57I know these are going to be challenging times with respect to seeking the increases that you're seeking.
00:32:02I share the need for the increase for federal public defenders having practiced, and I've been on both sides of that.
00:32:11It's critical to make sure we've got enough people there to handle the workload that's coming through.
00:32:16That workload, certainly in the District of Columbia, is increasing.
00:32:21And we need to make sure that we're up to the task on that front and making sure that people have a chance to get equal justice.
00:32:27So thank you for the work that you do.
00:32:29I appreciate your testimony, and I yield back.
00:32:31The gentleman's time has expired.
00:32:33I now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina, my friend, Representative Edwards, for five minutes.
00:32:38Thank you, Mr. Chair.
00:32:39Judge Conrad, with over 800 federally owned or leased court facilities, the judiciary is one of GSA's three largest tenants.
00:32:50How have organizational changes in the GSA affected the facilities of the federal judiciary?
00:32:56We have an ongoing relationship with the GSA, both in terms of courthouse construction and maintenance.
00:33:07We have historically asked for more than they can deliver with respect to their funding.
00:33:14I mentioned the Puerto Rico emergency situation where the courthouse is outdated, unsafe, and built on a seismic fault line in a district where there's a very high-value violent crime caseload.
00:33:31And so there's ongoing efforts at doing things efficiently, but the ability to maintain our courts, and particularly our older courts, is in good times stress, but in these times a real challenge for us.
00:33:51And so I've met recently with the public building commissioner.
00:33:55We have ongoing dialogue with the GSA.
00:34:00We've actually, in light of some recent developments, had the ability to hire some really competent GSA people who turned out looking for jobs.
00:34:10And they've come with us and bring with them a real knowledge of how things work on the other side and enable us to communicate better.
00:34:18I recognize that 10 federal courthouses appeared on the now-redacted list of non-core federal facilities released by the GSA.
00:34:30Six courthouses currently appear on GSA's list of assets identified for accelerated disposition.
00:34:37How frequently does the judiciary dispose of properties from the real estate portfolios?
00:34:43We have a space and facilities committee of the judicial conference that looks at this question with some degree of intensity.
00:34:53I can speak from the district that you come from in the Western District of North Carolina.
00:35:00We, years ago, had five federal courthouses.
00:35:03We now have three.
00:35:04And so that's an ongoing examination by our branch.
00:35:12And caseload changes, population changes are all taken into consideration.
00:35:18Resident or non-resident judges in courthouses impact the decision whether to close a courthouse or not.
00:35:26I've had three conversations this week with different judges across the country who are actively considering whether to close down a courthouse or keep it open.
00:35:38And so I think with our budget requests, we're also acting responsibly to try to contain our courthouse footprint
00:35:48and ask you for funding only when it's absolutely necessary.
00:35:53Does the judiciary currently own or lease any courtroom or office space that's not currently occupied or in use?
00:36:04I don't have on the top of my head the number of – you're asking about non-resident judge courthouses?
00:36:13Well, any federal courthouse or office.
00:36:17There are districts that have courthouses where judges travel from one courthouse to another to serve the needs of a different division.
00:36:26I don't have the exact number of those courthouses.
00:36:30Final question is, when preparing for hearings like this one, I typically find Inspector General Reports to be a really good resource for information on how agencies can improve their performance.
00:36:43And I really was intrigued to learn that while the Department of Justice has an Inspector General, the Federal Judiciary does not.
00:36:54And I was just curious to know your thoughts on why or why not should the Federal Judiciary have an Inspector General?
00:37:03We are a separate and independent branch of government that is decentralized in its structure.
00:37:15And we don't have a single Inspector General audit.
00:37:19We have approximately 100 audits that go on every year from the various district courts across the country.
00:37:27We have an audit committee.
00:37:29Our governance is through the judicial conference, as you know.
00:37:33And we have 25 different judicial conference committees made up of volunteer judges and others who create policy for us, conduct audits.
00:37:45And our belief is that we're very responsible in the use of the funds that you give us and that we're very careful with our judicial conference audit committee, with our budget committee, and the other structure that we have in place.
00:38:08And although we don't have a single IG audit that you speak of, we have the information necessary to tell you where the money is spent and how we're using it.
00:38:23I appreciate your time.
00:38:25The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
00:38:27Mr. Cloud, for any questions?
00:38:31Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
00:38:32Thank you both for being here.
00:38:33Thank you for the work you do in our all-important judiciary.
00:38:37I had a couple questions I wanted to bring up.
00:38:41One, I read through the strategic plan, and my understanding is those come out every five years, so we should be expecting another one this year.
00:38:49Is that correct?
00:38:50Yes.
00:38:50About when could we expect that?
00:38:53We have spent time at the last two judicial conferences getting out the strategic plan to the committee responsible for it, to the other conference committees.
00:39:07That have input in it.
00:39:09Is there a time?
00:39:10I'm sorry.
00:39:10We work in process.
00:39:12I have a lot of stuff to go through, so is there a date that we can, roughly, I'm not.
00:39:16The next judicial conference is in October of 2025.
00:39:20Okay.
00:39:21So is that when we would expect the report, shortly thereafter?
00:39:23It's possible that it would be produced at that time.
00:39:25Okay.
00:39:27You had mentioned, Judge Conrad, in your statement, the importance of us protecting judges against hurt or threats of impeachment.
00:39:38I think it's dangerous to combine those two in the same sentence.
00:39:41Against hurt, yes, we should definitely protect them.
00:39:44But that would be like you telling me that I should not be worried about what the people will think who elected me.
00:39:52Impeachment is a constitutional role to hold the judiciary accountable.
00:39:57And certainly, you know, Congress created these courts with the exception of the Supreme Court, and that is our mechanism to deal with the legal system that's gone wayward.
00:40:07So we want to do everything we can to protect the judges and anyone involved in the legal process, but I think it's a dangerous ground to say that.
00:40:17And I was actually disappointed by this chief justice when he came out with everything going on in the judiciary right now.
00:40:24For him to come out and take issue with the president when there's a lot of work to be done within the judiciary is very concerning.
00:40:35Now, one of the big issues, and the second one in the strategic plan, which I certainly appreciate, was preserving public trust, confidence, and understanding.
00:40:46And it talked basically about the need to educate the public about everything that's going on.
00:40:50Now, a lot's happened in five years, and we've seen a lot of what some would say is lawfare.
00:40:56I certainly would agree with that.
00:40:58I think a number of Americans do.
00:40:59And I'm wondering what you will do as we approach the next strategic plan to deal with these sort of things, where we see lawyers who represent President Trump disbarred and threatened just for representing him in some cases.
00:41:16And then we see those prosecuting President Trump basically given a free pass.
00:41:24And so you could go down the long list of bad practices that has happened, but, you know, from Jack Smith to Fannie Willis was disqualified from the case and Nathan Wade from his case,
00:41:40but none of them, neither of them have faced disbarment.
00:41:46Alvin Bragg turned a misdemeanor into invented law, basically, in order to bring indictments.
00:41:52He has not been referred to for disembarment.
00:41:56Leticia James has been basically under investigation for the very thing she accused President Trump of.
00:42:06And Alisa Stefanik and others have called for her to be disbarred, has not been referred.
00:42:11You know, so we see a duplicity here, and that's where we're getting a lot of the mistrust that the Americans have in the judiciary right now.
00:42:22I'm wondering what your strategic plan will do to address those concerns.
00:42:25I'd like to go back to your first comment and work from there, where you identify that in my opening remarks,
00:42:33I had referred to the physical security of judges in impeachment in the same phrase or sentence.
00:42:43And your point's a fair one, and I take it as a clarification.
00:42:49From the independent judiciary's perspective, they do represent two harms.
00:42:59The first harm is to judges and their family members who have been threatened either by intimidation
00:43:09or actual physical violence that the last several years, the marshals have...
00:43:17We've met with the Supreme Court and the administrative judge, and we've discussed this.
00:43:23You know, I don't think there's debate across the aisle as to whether or not we should protect judges,
00:43:27at least hopefully in this chamber.
00:43:30And then the second...
00:43:30My concern is, what are we going to do to restore trust in the American people
00:43:34in a judicial process that seems very partisan?
00:43:36For example, district judges who think that they can impose executive mandates.
00:43:42I mean, you go read Federalist 78, and it's very clear the judiciary will have no force or will
00:43:47over the purse or the sword, and yet we have a number of judicial judges who seem to think
00:43:53that they've been elected president.
00:43:55And our system for 250 years has functioned with one branch having the sword,
00:44:03one branch having the purse, and the third branch being supposedly the least dangerous of the branches.
00:44:12There is disagreement, strong disagreement, passionate disagreement with the rulings of district court judges.
00:44:20Our tradition of justice has been to challenge those rulings, to appeal them,
00:44:29and to get the ruling that you think, as a litigant, you're entitled to.
00:44:35The question was, what were you going to do in the strategic plan?
00:44:39And my time's up, Chairman.
00:44:41That's the answer.
00:44:42The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Iowa, Ms. Henson, for five minutes.
00:44:46Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
00:44:47Good morning.
00:44:48Thank you so much, Judges Conrad and St. Eve, for being with us today and answering our questions.
00:44:53In my district in northeast Iowa, we are home to the northern district of Iowa for the U.S. District Court,
00:44:59and we are very blessed to have the leadership of our chief judge, C.J. Williams,
00:45:04and the strong presence of the court in our community.
00:45:06So I just want to say thank you to the great people who work in our federal courthouse.
00:45:10My office also happens to be in the building, so we get to see them on a regular basis.
00:45:15And I know how committed our officials are to really protecting the integrity of their operations,
00:45:20and I do want to make sure that they have the tools necessary to respond to the evolving threats that we're seeing.
00:45:25And I'm running back and forth between the Homeland Security subcommittee meeting and this one,
00:45:29and so I just want to go to kind of an issue that kind of ties into both.
00:45:33I also serve on the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party,
00:45:36and I remain deeply concerned about the state-sponsored cyber attacks and threats that we've seen coming out of the CCP.
00:45:43This really affects all branches of the federal government, including the judiciary.
00:45:48So we've seen how those actors with the PRC are really targeting our federal networks,
00:45:54the critical infrastructure there,
00:45:55and even attempting to exploit many of those vulnerabilities within our judicial institutions.
00:46:01So given this threat landscape that we continue to see from the PRC,
00:46:06what specific steps are being taken to ensure that the judiciary's IT systems and applications
00:46:11are protected from these attacks from foreign adversaries,
00:46:15and is there a higher level of coordination happening with CISA, with the marshals,
00:46:20other federal agencies to ensure that these systems are safe and secure?
00:46:25Yes, thank you.
00:46:27The cybersecurity has been a priority of the judiciary, especially since 2021.
00:46:35We have an IT committee that focuses on this, and yes, we are coordinating with CISA.
00:46:42We've gotten input from them on our systems.
00:46:44We've coordinated with the director of cybersecurity.
00:46:47We have a five-year plan that we started in 2022 with this committee.
00:46:54We submitted a five-year funding plan for cybersecurity and IT modernization.
00:47:01On the security side, we've implemented a lot of changes, including zero-trust architecture,
00:47:08multifactor identification.
00:47:10So you can't, a judge or a staff member can't sign in at their desktop or remotely without dual authentication now.
00:47:19That's one of the standards we've been recommended to put in place.
00:47:22We're also putting a great effort forward to modernize our equipment.
00:47:28Some of it's obsolete, and because it's so old, it's really at a security risk.
00:47:33So by modernizing our equipment, we are prioritizing security with that new equipment,
00:47:40and with that just comes increased security procedures.
00:47:44So we thank this subcommittee because a couple years ago we had a cyber debriefing,
00:47:50and we talked about a five-year plan, and we put a five-year funding plan in place,
00:47:54and it's important that we continue to get that money, and we have been putting it to good use.
00:48:00Well, I would love to get some more details on some of the other things that you've put into place,
00:48:04just kind of an accounting of that so far.
00:48:06So a five-year plan, obviously, kind of then up in 2027 to kind of look at maybe next steps there.
00:48:11Just want to make sure that we're keeping pace with what we need to keep up with that threat.
00:48:16Happy to do that.
00:48:17Yeah, so I appreciate that.
00:48:18Maybe on follow-up.
00:48:19And then one quick question as my time is coming into end.
00:48:22You know, when I look at a rural state like mine here in Iowa,
00:48:25we know that there can be some barriers to accessing federal courts.
00:48:29We know you mentioned judges that are going back and forth.
00:48:32I had lunch with the chief judge a few weeks ago to talk through some of those concerns,
00:48:36especially as the caseloads continue to grow.
00:48:39So what are some of the challenges that courts are facing in managing this demand,
00:48:43and how critical is it that we have the adequate number of judgeships to meet those growing caseloads?
00:48:50So thank you for that question, because I do think there is a need that we proved last year for more judges
00:48:58and hope to use the momentum that we established with the Senate and the House last year
00:49:06in terms of all three entities agreeing with respect to that need.
00:49:12We have a judge's bill that is currently in the House right now.
00:49:21Our judicial conference has recommended 69 new district court judge positions
00:49:28and two appellate court positions, and those are based on a very careful study of the 94 districts in the country
00:49:40and the places where judgeships are most needed,
00:49:43and so that is an area where we could benefit tremendously if the positions were created.
00:49:51I think it's the Judges Act, so yeah, absolutely.
00:49:54Well, I appreciate you testifying today, and I think I'll stay tuned for round two.
00:49:57Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
00:50:00Thank you, Ms. Henson.
00:50:01And the chair now recognizes the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer.
00:50:06I want to thank the chairman.
00:50:08Thank you very much.
00:50:09I don't have any questions, but I do want to make an observation on Mr. Clown's comments.
00:50:17I've been here a long time, but in the history of the country,
00:50:19I do not think we've had, well, I mean, in recent times,
00:50:24we have not had the challenge to the Congress's authority as we've seen in this administration.
00:50:32There are judges, including the Supreme Court,
00:50:36who have concluded on a TRO basis or a temporary basis,
00:50:43I don't know of a final decision,
00:50:45but that the administration is not following the law.
00:50:50Mr. Clown observes that the district court judges are somehow accruing to themselves executive authority.
00:50:58I differ with the gentleman.
00:51:00What they are saying is, in their judgment,
00:51:03the executive does not have the authority that they're exercising.
00:51:06That is what checks and balances means.
00:51:10That is the essence of our democracy.
00:51:12That is the essence of how one branch checks the other branch.
00:51:18And I want to make it very clear that the disdain that is directed at judges
00:51:27for saying that the executive department is not acting consistent with the law
00:51:33and with the separation of powers is not accruing to itself executive authority.
00:51:40It is doing its job of asserting what the correct balance under law
00:51:46and under the Constitution is between the three branches of government.
00:51:50And I, for one, would hope that judges would continue to do that.
00:51:56And very frankly, I've been upset with judges in the past, as we all get upset,
00:52:01because we disagree with them.
00:52:03That's our democracy.
00:52:05We disagree.
00:52:07I've disagreed strongly with the Supreme Court.
00:52:11But I've never suggested that, therefore, one of them be removed
00:52:15or a group of them be removed because of decisions that I didn't like.
00:52:20We have a structure to do that.
00:52:23We have constitutional amendments, which are very difficult.
00:52:26We have statutory law, which is not nearly as difficult.
00:52:30And we have elections for presidents in Congress to change policy.
00:52:37But I want to make that observation, Mr. Chairman,
00:52:39because I think the assertion that somehow judges are accruing to themselves
00:52:47authority, which they do not have, is inaccurate.
00:52:52And I'm going to go back to my other hearing now, Mr. Chairman.
00:52:55It's a balancing act.
00:52:57Thank you, Mr. Hoyer.
00:52:58The chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York
00:53:01and the vice chair of this committee, Mr. Lelotta,
00:53:03for any questions he may have in five minutes.
00:53:05Thank you, Chairman.
00:53:06Before I get to my questions, I'm going to yield a minute of my time to Mr. Cloud.
00:53:09I'll keep this really brief.
00:53:10I appreciate Mr. Hoyer's thoughts.
00:53:13I would point to the Biden administration who willfully did not listen to the Supreme Court
00:53:20when it came to student loan programs, among other things.
00:53:23The district judge's jurisdiction is in the title itself.
00:53:27It's a district judge.
00:53:28And the idea that they can have these federal injunctions that limit the president's executive
00:53:35authority that's clearly, clearly given to him in the Constitution is well beyond the Constitution
00:53:42and should be dealt with by this Congress, including impeachment.
00:53:49Judge St. Eve, how are you?
00:53:50Good.
00:53:51Thanks for being with us today.
00:53:52You mentioned earlier the increased prosecutions tied to immigration crimes,
00:53:57including illegal reentry and cartel-related trafficking.
00:54:01Your Honor, do you believe we need more immigration judges in this country?
00:54:05We probably do.
00:54:09That's outside of Article III and outside of my specialty.
00:54:13I get appeals from the Board of Immigration after they've gone through immigration judges.
00:54:20But in terms of our budget, that is outside of my expertise.
00:54:26You have 23 years on the bench.
00:54:2823 years on the bench.
00:54:29You're now a circuit court of appeals judge.
00:54:33Pretty prestigious.
00:54:34It must come with a ton of experience.
00:54:36Just as a matter of judicial efficiency, supply and demand concepts.
00:54:41A lot of immigration court cases come before our courts.
00:54:45Would we be able to dispense with them more expediently if we had more judicial staff?
00:54:50Yes.
00:54:50What I see in appeals is they get backed up because of the volume going through immigration.
00:54:56So, yes, from a pure efficiency standpoint, more immigration judges would be able to help process the immigration proceedings.
00:55:06And based on your 23 years' experience on the federal bench, what's the consequence of judicial inefficiency, specifically with respect to not being able to dispense with some of these immigration cases?
00:55:17It clogs up the system.
00:55:19It clogs up the system.
00:55:20The delay, you see some things that take years to complete, that backs up everything behind them.
00:55:29So, and it's expensive.
00:55:31Sure.
00:55:32So, let's talk about asylum for a moment.
00:55:34My understanding is roughly three of every four asylum claims are adjudicated in the petitioners, against the petitioners' request.
00:55:41That three or four don't qualify for traditional asylum.
00:55:45And yet, the standard of this country has been, at least under the Biden administration, when somebody claims asylum at the border, Biden paroled them to the interior of the country, pending their immigration case.
00:55:56It takes years, often, for that case to be heard.
00:56:00So, isn't it a consequence of a judicial inefficiency, those years that it takes to get to those cases, these folks, three or four, who don't ordinarily qualify for this, isn't a consequence?
00:56:10You have a bunch of folks in this country who are not really here under the authorities traditionally granted under asylum?
00:56:17It's hard for me to generalize like that and say it's because of judicial inefficiency.
00:56:22I don't know.
00:56:23Some of the appeals that I see, there are lots of extensions requested by the lawyers.
00:56:29There are extensions requested while you're waiting to get a lawyer.
00:56:32So, I think it's hard to make a general statement that everything could be blamed on judicial inefficiency.
00:56:38I'm surely not blaming everything on it, but I would posit that you have a lot of folks in this country who feigned asylum on their way in and took advantage of the system that was laid out to them.
00:56:49Probably not fault of their own.
00:56:50The door was wide open.
00:56:52They got paroled in the interior country.
00:56:53A lot of them found their way to New York where they got the free hotels and the health care, and it was an incentive to get there.
00:56:58What I'm offering is, if we had a quicker judicial system, more judges to dispense with these cases, we can get to the point of the game where, okay, you don't qualify for asylum.
00:57:10Now you've got to go back home.
00:57:11So, my question, Your Honor, is what is the judiciary doing to get to a proper staffing?
00:57:15So, for staffing for us, and again, immigration is not within the budget request that I'm here testifying about today, but in terms of staffing, we have work measurement formulas based upon real statistics of what our caseload is.
00:57:34And the staffing we request that's in our salaries and expenses account is based upon those work measurement formulas and what our anticipated workload is and what the anticipated caseload is.
00:57:47And that's what we base our budget on in our request.
00:57:50Great.
00:57:51Real quickly, with a few seconds, I have our meeting.
00:57:53With respect to the border district courts, are they getting the judges and the staffing they need, or are we stretching existing personnel too thin?
00:58:01We are definitely stretching existing personnel too thin, and I think in addition to the staff, the court staff, and the staff in the clerk's offices, there's probation and pretrial.
00:58:13And at the border states, when you have a lot of defendants who are coming through, that really stretches the resources of the pretrial services officers and the probation officers.
00:58:24Thank you, Your Honor.
00:58:25Your feedback is valuable to us.
00:58:26We appreciate it.
00:58:27I yield.
00:58:28Thank you, Congressman.
00:58:29Thank you very much.
00:58:30The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Alford, for any questions he may ask.
00:58:35Well, thank you very much.
00:58:37I appreciate that.
00:58:38Good to have our witnesses here.
00:58:39Appreciate your time for coming here.
00:58:44Justices today face unprecedented threats to their personal safety.
00:58:50In an era of social media, mobs who disagree with legal interpretation share personal, identifiable information on social media.
00:58:57These online mobs encourage violence against judges and will dox their home addresses, familiar information, and anything else they can get their grubby little hands on.
00:59:10Judge Conrad, how does the judiciary's threat management branch help remove this information from the public domain, and what can Congress do to ensure the safety of folks like you?
00:59:23So, for a number of years, we've been active in trying to get the Daniel Andrell bill.
00:59:31Is your mic on, sir?
00:59:32Is your mic on, sir?
00:59:34Would you please start over?
00:59:36For a number of years, we've been very active, pursuant to the Daniel Andrell bill and other efforts at getting both in state courts and across the country, that personal identification information offline.
00:59:51And we have encouraged judges to sign up for delete me type protections where the internet is scrubbed for personal identification information.
01:00:04And over 80 percent, or near 80 percent of our judges are engaged in those kind of efforts.
01:00:14What do we need to do to get all of them involved in those efforts?
01:00:17Well, we do, at every judicial conference across the country, we have a component that deals with judicial security and encourage best practices with respect to our judges.
01:00:34Just over a month ago, a California man pleaded guilty to attempted murder of Justice Brett Kavanaugh three years ago.
01:00:40He was arrested outside the justice's residence with a gun, a knife, zip ties in the wake of Supreme Court's Dobbs decision.
01:00:46While I understand that the Supreme Court handles their own threats, has the rest of the judiciary moved to strengthening security after potentially large decisions like that could sway action by mentally deranged people?
01:01:01Well, we have active coordination with the United States Marshals Service and try to surge resources to areas that we can anticipate problems.
01:01:15We have requested funding for courthouse hardening projects that will provide security to courthouses.
01:01:23And we have encouraged judges to and supported them financially in obtaining home intrusion detection systems.
01:01:32And so we're pretty focused on the home and the courthouse.
01:01:38Sometimes the vulnerability is in between.
01:01:41How much money do you need from us to make sure that those programs get put in place, that we protect our judiciary?
01:01:47Well, we are asking for our court security account, $892 million.
01:01:54That funds our court security officers, the vulnerability management program that Judge Conrad just mentioned.
01:02:02And it also funds updating security equipment in the courthouses.
01:02:07And it's really needed for that last piece because that account has been frozen for the last two years.
01:02:14So we've had to take money from that account that was intended to update our equipment, to put new cameras in, new security measures in.
01:02:23We've had to take that money and use it to pay for the court security officers and the vulnerability management program.
01:02:30It's called robbing Peter to pay Paul.
01:02:31Exactly.
01:02:31What happens if we don't get this funded?
01:02:35That equipment will become more obsolete and increase security risks at courthouses around the country.
01:02:44Mr. Chair, I respectfully submit that we take a good, close look at this.
01:02:49I know we will because this is a precious part of our government.
01:02:54We need to protect those who serve us through the judiciary.
01:02:57And with that, I yield back.
01:02:58Thank you, sir.
01:02:59Thank you for that observation.
01:03:00And the chair totally agrees with you.
01:03:03The chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Edwards.
01:03:08More questions?
01:03:09Thank you, Mr. Chair.
01:03:10Let's turn the conversation to technology.
01:03:15Something I think we don't spend nearly enough time talking about.
01:03:19And when I look at your budget request and the historical spending, I see that the federal judiciary spends, let's call it about a million dollars a year, which doesn't seem like a whole lot of money.
01:03:31But I know that often money towards technology goes into a big old black hole.
01:03:39Can you tell me a little bit about how that million dollars or so is being spent?
01:03:48How much of that is on maintenance?
01:03:49How much is on new software development?
01:03:54The portion on new software development, how do you know we're getting our money's worth out of it?
01:03:59I was an appropriator for technology back in North Carolina when I served in the Senate.
01:04:05And I know we invested tens of millions of dollars in new development.
01:04:09Years later, we'd run into a roadblock and realize we've wasted all the new development money that we had and we had to start over again.
01:04:18And I'm just curious, are you finding those types of issues?
01:04:22So when it comes to the JITF funding, how is that being spent?
01:04:30What are your concerns?
01:04:31Okay.
01:04:32Thank you for clarifying that, Congressman Edwards.
01:04:34If I understand you're asking in particular about our money into JITF.
01:04:39Let's start with that.
01:04:40Okay.
01:04:41And then tell me if there's something else that I'm not looking at.
01:04:43As opposed to some of our cybersecurity efforts and the FISA plan.
01:04:47Separate from cybersecurity.
01:04:48Okay.
01:04:48Okay.
01:04:48Thank you for that clarification.
01:04:50So our systems are becoming obsolete.
01:04:54And for years, we did not put money into IT.
01:04:59Common story.
01:05:00Yes.
01:05:01Yeah.
01:05:01For a long time, people thought IT was the, you know, oh, I need my printer fixed.
01:05:06And it's changed dramatically.
01:05:09But for years, and because we try to be good stewards of the money, we put our priority elsewhere.
01:05:17And as a result of that, we lost people in IT and our systems have become obsolete.
01:05:24So the money that goes to our IT account is going really to rebuild those systems and to modernize them.
01:05:33And along with that modernization comes security.
01:05:36Part of that money goes to bringing on and keeping IT personnel, which is, as you probably know, very hard to do because a lot of IT personnel can earn a lot of money if they go outside of the government.
01:05:52And so trying to keep those people is very important to us.
01:05:57But we really depleted our IT to a large extent in terms of personnel.
01:06:04And we've been trying to increase that because it's essential to keeping our systems secure and modern.
01:06:12I will, Mr. Chair, I'm going to submit some written questions.
01:06:16I'd like to understand more about the investment in IT and where you see the future.
01:06:21But let's shift to AI now.
01:06:25Where does artificial intelligence fall into the overall platform or plans for the federal judiciary?
01:06:35So the director, and maybe I'll let you answer this, has put together an AI task force.
01:06:40Recently, and it's directed both at the ways in which AI can be a benefit to the justice system and in ways to prevent it from being destructive.
01:06:56And so the task force consists of gifted people across the country identifying the AI issues that we deal with now
01:07:11and hopefully anticipating them in the future.
01:07:16That task force has been recently comprised, and we look forward to learning a lot through it.
01:07:23Will you be sharing the results of that task force with this committee?
01:07:28I'd be glad to.
01:07:29Yes, sir.
01:07:30That'll be one of my requests in my written follow-up.
01:07:35Thank you, Mr. Chair.
01:07:38Thank you, sir.
01:07:41Mr. Alford is good with his questions, and I appreciate your time here today with that.
01:07:47I know this has been very engaging and fun for you.
01:07:50And our time has concluded.
01:07:52But I'd like to thank you both for being here today.
01:07:55I know, as Mr. Edwards has indicated, there may be members who would like to submit questions for the record.
01:08:01I ask that you submit those records for the subcommittee staff within the next seven days.
01:08:06And with that, this subcommittee stands adjourned.
01:08:12He-haw.