[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 22, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H2954-H2956]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CRIMINAL JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION ACT OF 2021
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 2694) to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for
transportation and subsistence for criminal justice defendants, and for
other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2694
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Criminal Judicial
Administration Act of 2021''.
SEC. 2. TRANSPORTATION AND SUBSISTENCE FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
ACT DEFENDANTS.
Section 4285 of title 18, United States Code, is amended in
the first sentence--
(1) by striking ``when the interests of justice would be
served thereby and the United States judge or magistrate
judge is satisfied, after appropriate inquiry, that the
defendant is financially unable to provide the necessary
transportation to appear before the required court on his
own'' and inserting ``when the United States judge or
magistrate judge is satisfied that the defendant is indigent
based on appointment of counsel pursuant to section 3006A,
or, after appropriate inquiry, that the defendant is
financially unable to provide necessary transportation on his
own'';
(2) by striking ``to the place where his appearance is
required,'' and inserting ``(1) to the place where each
appearance is required and (2) to return to the place of the
person's arrest or bona fide residence,''; and
(3) by striking ``to his destination,'' and inserting
``which includes money for both lodging and food, during
travel to the person's destination and during any proceeding
at which the person's appearance is required''.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE USE OF MAGISTRATE JUDGES TO DECIDE
POSTJUDGMENT MOTIONS.
Section 3401 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the second sentence, by striking ``and'' after
``trial, judgment,'';
(B) in the second sentence, by inserting ``, and rulings on
all post-judgment motions'' after ``sentencing'';
(C) in the third sentence, by striking ``and'' after
``trial, judgment,''; and
(D) in the third sentence, by inserting ``, and rulings on
all post-judgment motions'' after ``sentencing'';
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``, with the approval of
a judge of the district court,''; and
(3) by inserting after subsection (i) the following:
``(j) A magistrate judge who exercises trial jurisdiction
under this section, in either a petty offense case or a
misdemeanor case in which the defendant has consented to a
magistrate judge, may also rule on all post-judgment motions
in that case, including but not limited to petitions for
writs of habeas corpus, writs of coram nobis, motions to
vacate a sentence under section 2255 of title 28, and motions
related to mental competency under chapter 313 of this
title.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Bishop)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
General Leave
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 2694.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2694, the Criminal Judicial Administration Act of
2021, is bipartisan legislation that makes two modest but important
amendments to current law, promoting efficient, effective, and fair
administration of justice.
The first part of this bill concerns out-of-custody criminal
defendants, particularly those who are released pending trial to live
in communities that are located far from the courthouses where their
cases are being heard.
Most Federal criminal defendants are detained pending trial. The U.S.
Marshals Service is responsible for housing and transporting them to
court hearings, including trial. Under current law, the court may order
the marshals to provide funds for a criminal defendant who is released
pending trial but cannot afford the cost of travel to the location of
the courthouse for required court proceedings.
However, defendants must fund their own way back home, and defendants
in this position are not able to receive financial support from the
marshals for subsistence, such as lodging and meals. For an indigent
defendant, these costs are sometimes insurmountable.
For years, Federal courts have struggled with how to assist indigent
defendants when they find themselves in these difficult situations.
Unfortunately, the courts' efforts have come up against the text of the
statute.
This bill would authorize courts, in the interest of justice, to
order the U.S. marshals to cover roundtrip travel and subsistence for
defendants who must attend court hearings but who cannot afford to pay
this on their own. The Judicial Conference of the United States has
urged us to correct this grave unfairness, and I am pleased to see that
we are finally doing so with this bill.
The second part of this bill, concerning Federal magistrate judges,
is
[[Page H2955]]
also supported by the Judicial Conference. Magistrate judges have trial
jurisdiction over certain misdemeanors, except for Class A
misdemeanors, for which the maximum sentence is up to 1 year in
custody. With a defendant's consent, however, a magistrate judge may
exercise trial jurisdiction over a case involving a Class A
misdemeanor. Magistrate judges frequently do so and often hear Class A
misdemeanor cases all the way through judgment and sentencing.
{time} 1545
Under current law, a magistrate judge's jurisdiction ends after
judgment is entered in a misdemeanor case, and post-judgment
jurisdiction reverts to the district court. Indeed, magistrate judges
are not authorized to hear post-judgment motions, such as motions to
vacate a sentence, even though they are the ones who handled the entire
matter at the trial level and are best equipped to hear such post-
judgment motions.
Among other things, this bill would authorize a magistrate judge to
hear post-judgment motions in misdemeanor cases in which he or she
exercised trial jurisdiction. This amendment clearly improves judicial
economy and makes perfect sense.
This is a straightforward and bipartisan measure that will help our
criminal justice system operate in a more effective and fair manner. I
thank Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Roy for sponsoring this legislation, and I
urge all Members to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2694, the Criminal Judicial
Administration Act of 2021.
This bill strengthens existing laws that provide for the
transportation and subsistence for indigent criminal defendants when
they are brought to court proceedings.
H.R. 2694 also allows a magistrate judge to finally decide post-
judgment motions in a misdemeanor case where that magistrate judge was
the judge who handled the underlying case.
This provision will improve the efficiency of our court system by
allowing our courts to manage caseloads in a more economical manner.
I thank the bipartisan sponsors of this legislation, and I urge my
colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2694, the
Criminal Judicial Administration Act of 2021.
This legislation reflects another step in our ongoing work commitment
to ensure that justice is administered fairly and equally in this
country.
The first part of the bill relates to our Federal pretrial system. I
thank Mr. Nadler, our chairman; and, of course, the author of this
bill, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).
As we work on changes to our pretrial system, we must also make
certain that indigent defendants who are released on bail pending
trial, who live far away from the courthouse in which they must appear,
can make it to the court for required appearances.
As the chair of the Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security
Subcommittee, it is our committee that deals with the criminal justice
system and the system that should be fair to victim and alleged
perpetrator. That means that individuals who are defendants and are
indigent must be able to get to the courthouse in order to assure a
fair justice system.
For out-of-custody defendants, the financial and emotional toll of
making required court appearances is considerable. It can mean taking
time off from sorely needed jobs, sometimes without compensation, or
shifting scarce household resources to make it to court on time and to
avoid rearrest for failure to appear.
These challenges are heightened for defendants who have cases pending
in districts that are far from where they live. This distance can also
lead to unnecessary pretrial detention, as courts wrestle with how to
ensure that defendants who live out of their districts can make
required court appearances. This is a commonsense legislative
initiative.
H.R. 2694 gives courts the ability to direct the U.S. marshals to
provide for roundtrip travel and subsistence for indigent defendants or
those who cannot otherwise afford those costs to attend court during
the pendency of their cases.
This is an important step in our work on Federal pretrial reform,
and, as I said, common sense in fairness of the system.
The second part of the bill promotes judicial economy by allowing
magistrate judges to oversee the entirety of the cases in which they
exercised trial jurisdiction. This administrative step is important for
our overburdened Federal judiciary and our efforts to fairly administer
justice to all individuals. That is certainly the responsibility of
those of us on the House Judiciary Committee.
I thank Representative Jeffries for his work on this bill, which I
encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2694, the Criminal Judicial
Administration Act of 2021. This legislation reflects another step in
our ongoing work and commitment to ensure that justice is administered
fairly and equally in this country.
The first part of the bill relates to our federal pretrial system.
As we work on changes to our pretrial system, we must also make
certain that indigent defendants who are released on bail pending
trial--but live far away from the courthouse in which they must
appear--can make it to court for required appearances.
For out-of-custody defendants, the financial and emotional toll of
making required court appearances is considerable. It can mean missing
time off from sorely needed jobs, sometimes without compensation, or
shifting scarce household resources to make it to court on time and to
avoid re-arrest for failure to appear.
These challenges are heightened for defendants who have cases pending
in districts that are far from where they live. This distance can also
lead to unnecessary pretrial detention, as courts wrestle with how to
ensure that defendants who live out of their districts can make
required court appearances.
H.R. 2694 gives courts the ability to direct the U.S. Marshals to
provide for roundtrip travel and subsistence for indigent defendants--
or those who cannot otherwise afford these costs--to attend court
during the pendency of their cases. This is an important step in our
work on federal pretrial reform.
The second part of the bill promotes judicial economy by allowing
magistrate judges to oversee the entirety of the cases in which they
exercise trial jurisdiction. This administrative step is important for
our overburdened federal judiciary, and our efforts to fairly
administer justice to all individuals.
I thank Representative Jeffries for his work on this bill, which I
encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting today.
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to
improve the administration of justice through our court system by
supporting this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, the Criminal Judicial Administration Act of
2021 would make several critical changes to improve the operation of
our Federal criminal justice system.
I commend Representatives Hakeem Jeffries and Chip Roy for
introducing the legislation, as well as their bipartisan cosponsors for
their leadership in bringing these important issues to our attention.
I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this
bipartisan bill today.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2694, the
Criminal Judicial Administration Act of 2021. This legislation reflects
another step in our ongoing work and commitment to ensure that justice
is administered fairly and equally in this country.
The first part of the bill relates to our federal pretrial system.
As we work on changes to our pretrial system, we must also make
certain that indigent defendants who are released on bail pending
trial--but live far away from the courthouse in which they must
appear--can make it to court for required appearances.
For out-of-custody defendants, the financial and emotional toll of
making required court appearances is considerable. It can mean missing
time off from sorely needed jobs, sometimes without compensation, or
shifting scarce
[[Page H2956]]
household resources to make it to court on time and to avoid re-arrest
for failure to appear.
These challenges are heightened for defendants who have cases pending
in districts that are far from where they live. This distance can also
lead to unnecessary pretrial detention, as courts wrestle with how to
ensure that defendants who live out of their districts can make
required court appearances.
H.R. 2694 gives courts the ability to direct the U.S. Marshals to
provide for roundtrip travel and subsistence for indigent defendants--
or those who cannot otherwise afford these costs--to attend court
during the pendency of their cases. This is an important step in our
work on federal pretrial reform.
The second part of the bill promotes judicial economy by allowing
magistrate judges to oversee the entirety of the cases in which they
exercise trial jurisdiction. This administrative step is important for
our overburdened federal judiciary, and our efforts to fairly
administer justice to all individuals.
I thank Representative Jeffries for his work on this bill, which I
encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting today.
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, everyone--regardless of their financial
situation--should be able to fully and fairly defend themselves in
court.
Unfortunately, however, many defendants who live very far away from
the court trying their case cannot afford to get to and from their
court appearances to defend themselves. The costs can be simply
insurmountable.
This situation often makes poverty the difference between winning and
losing a case, regardless of the facts.
That is not justice.
This bill helps make courtroom justice available to everyone by
ensuring that travel and lodging costs are covered for low-income
defendants.
This will help ensure justice for all defendants, not just those
wealthy enough to afford it.
This bill also makes courtrooms more effective. It allows magistrate
judges to rule on certain post-judgment issues that they previously
could not adjudicate on cases that they handled at the trial level.
This is common sense. If a case has been with a judge through the
entirety of the trial, that judge knows the case best and should be
able to handle post-conviction issues.
As a former litigator, I believe this bill will help ensure that
justice prevails and make our overburdened court system more efficient,
and I thank Congressman Jeffries for introducing this important
legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 2694.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this motion
are postponed.
____________________