______________________________________
Overview of the Federal Court System (PDF)
Judiciary Ethics (PDF)
Code of Conduct (PDF)
Conflicts of Interest (PDF)
District Map (PDF)
The United States district courts are the trial courts of the federal court system. Within limits set by Congress and the Constitution, the district courts have jurisdiction to hear nearly all categories of federal cases, including both civil and criminal matters. There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least one district in each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Each district includes a United States bankruptcy court as a unit of the district court. Three territories of the United States — the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands — have district courts that hear federal cases, including bankruptcy cases.
There are two special trial courts that have nationwide jurisdiction over certain types of cases. The Court of International Trade addresses cases involving international trade and customs issues. The United States Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction over most claims for money damages against the United States, disputes over federal contracts, unlawful "takings" of private property by the federal government, and a variety of other claims against the United States.
The 94 judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a United States court of appeals. A court of appeals hears appeals from the district courts located within its circuit, as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies. In addition, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has nationwide jurisdiction to hear appeals in specialized cases, such as those involving patent laws and cases decided by the Court of International Trade and the Court of Federal Claims.
The United States Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices. At its discretion, and within certain guidelines established by Congress, the Supreme Court each year hears a limited number of the cases it is asked to decide. Those cases may begin in the federal or state courts, and they usually involve important questions about the Constitution or federal law.
Before a federal court can hear a case, or "exercise its jurisdiction," certain conditions must be met. First, under the Constitution, federal courts exercise only "judicial" powers. This means that federal judges may interpret the law only through the resolution of actual legal disputes, referred to in Article III of the Constitution as "Cases or Controversies." A court cannot attempt to correct a problem on its own initiative, or to answer a hypothetical
legal question.
Second, assuming there is an actual case or controversy, the plaintiff in a federal lawsuit also must have legal "standing" to ask the court for a decision. That means the plaintiff must have been aggrieved, or legally harmed in some way, by the defendant.
Third, the case must present a category of dispute that the law in question was designed to address, and it must be a complaint that the court has the power to remedy. In other words, the court must be authorized, under the Constitution or a federal law, to hear the case and grant appropriate relief to the plaintiff. Finally, the case cannot be "moot," that is, it must present an ongoing problem for the court to resolve. The federal courts, thus, are courts of "limited" jurisdiction because they may only decide certain types of cases as provided by Congress or as identified in the Constitution.
Although the details of the complex web of federal jurisdiction that Congress has given the federal courts is beyond the scope of this brief guide, it is important to understand that there are two main sources of the cases coming before the federal courts: "federal question" jurisdiction, and "diversity" jurisdiction.
In general, federal courts may decide cases that involve the United States government, the United States Constitution or federal laws, or controversies between states or between the United States and foreign governments. A case that raises such a "federal question" may be filed in federal court. Examples of such cases might include a claim by an individual for entitlement to money under a federal government program such as Social Security, a claim by the government that someone has violated federal laws, or a challenge to actions taken by a federal agency.
A case also may be filed in federal court based on the "diversity of citizenship" of the litigants, such as between citizens of different states, or between United States citizens and those of another country. To ensure fairness to the out-of-state litigant, the Constitution provides that such cases may be heard in a federal court. An important limit to diversity jurisdiction is that only cases involving more than $75,000 in potential damages may be filed in a federal court. Claims below that amount may only be pursued in state court. Moreover, any diversity jurisdiction case regardless of the amount of money involved may be brought in a state court rather than a federal court.
Federal courts also have jurisdiction over all bankruptcy matters, which Congress has determined should be addressed in federal courts rather than the state courts. Through the bankruptcy process, individuals or businesses that can no longer pay their creditors may either seek a court-supervised liquidation of their assets, or they may reorganize their financial affairs and work out a plan to pay off their debts.
Although federal courts are located in every state, they are not the only forum available to potential litigants. In fact, the great majority of legal disputes in American courts are addressed in the separate state court systems. For example, state courts have jurisdiction over virtually all divorce and child custody matters, probate and inheritance issues, real estate questions, and juvenile matters, and they handle most criminal cases, contract disputes, traffic violations, and personal injury cases. In addition, certain categories of legal disputes may be resolved in special courts or entities that are part of the federal executive or legislative branches, and by state and federal administrative agencies.
The work of the federal courts touches upon many of the most significant issues affecting the American people, and federal judges exercise wide authority and discretion in the cases over which they preside. This section discusses how federal judges are chosen, and provides basic information on judicial compensation, ethics, and the role of senior and recalled judges.
Justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the courts of appeals and the district courts, and judges of the Court of International Trade, are appointed under Article III of the Constitution by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. Article III judges are appointed for life, and they can only be removed through the impeachment process. Although there are no special qualifications to become a judge of these courts, those who are nominated are typically very accomplished private or government attorneys, judges in state courts, magistrate judges or bankruptcy judges, or law professors. The judiciary plays no role in the nomination or confirmation process.
Bankruptcy judges are judicial officers of the district courts and are appointed by the courts of appeals for 14-year terms. Magistrate judges are judicial officers of the district courts and are appointed by the judges of the district court for eight-year terms. The President and the Senate play no role in the selection of bankruptcy and magistrate judges. Judges of the Court of Federal Claims are appointed for terms of 15 years by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Each court in the federal system has a chief judge who, in addition to hearing cases, has administrative responsibilities relating to the operation of the court. The chief judge is normally the judge who has served on the court the longest. Chief district and court of appeals judges must be under age 65 to be designated as chief judge. They may serve for a maximum of seven years and may not serve as chief judge beyond the age of 70.
All federal judges receive salaries and benefits that are set by Congress. Judicial salaries are roughly equal to salaries of Members of Congress.
Federal judges abide by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, a set of ethical principles and guidelines adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The Code of Conduct provides guidance for judges on issues of judicial integrity and independence, judicial diligence and impartiality, permissible extra-judicial activities, and the avoidance of impropriety or even its appearance.
Judges may not hear cases in which they have either personal knowledge of the disputed facts, a personal bias concerning a party to the case, earlier involvement in the case as a lawyer, or a financial interest in any party or subject matter of the case.
Many federal judges devote time to public service and educational activities. They have a distinguished history of service to the legal profession through their writing, speaking, and teaching. This important role is recognized in the Code of Conduct, which encourages judges to engage in activities to improve the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.
Court of appeals, district court, and Court of International Trade judges have life tenure, and they may retire if they are at least 65 years old and meet certain years of service requirements. Most Article III judges who are eligible to retire decide to continue to hear cases on a full- or part-time basis as "senior judges." Retired bankruptcy, magistrate, and Court of Federal Claims judges also may be "recalled" to active service. Without the efforts of senior and recalled judges, the judiciary would need many more judges to handle its cases. Senior judges, for example, typically handle about 15-20% of the appellate and district court workloads.
This section describes three key features of the federal judicial system and gives an overview of the process in criminal cases, civil cases, and bankruptcy proceedings. Also included are brief descriptions of jury service and selection procedures and the appeals process.
The litigation process in United States courts is referred to as an "adversarial" system because it relies on the litigants to present their dispute before a neutral fact-finder. According to American legal tradition, inherited from the English common law, the clash of adversaries before the court is most likely to allow the jury or judge to determine the truth and resolve the dispute at hand. In some other legal systems, judges or other court officials investigate and assist the parties to find relevant evidence or obtain testimony from witnesses. In the United States, the work of collecting evidence and preparing to present it to the court is accomplished by the litigants and their attorneys, normally without assistance from the court.
Another characteristic of the American judicial system is that litigants typically pay their own court costs and attorneys fees whether they win or lose. The federal courts charge fees that are mostly set by Congress. Other costs of litigation, such as attorneys and experts fees, are more substantial. In criminal cases the government pays the costs of investigation and prosecution. The government also provides a lawyer without cost for any criminal defendant who is unable to afford one. In civil cases, plaintiffs who cannot afford to pay court fees may seek permission from the court to proceed without paying those fees.
There are federal rules of evidence, and rules of civil, criminal, bankruptcy, and appellate procedure that must be followed in the federal courts. They are designed to promote simplicity, fairness, the just determination of litigation, and the elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay. The rules are drafted by committees of judges, lawyers, and professors appointed by the Chief Justice. They are published widely by the Administrative Office for public comment, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States, and promulgated by the Supreme Court. The rules become law unless the Congress votes to reject or modify them.
A federal civil case involves a legal dispute between two or more parties. To begin a civil lawsuit in federal court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and "serves" a copy of the complaint on the defendant. The complaint describes the plaintiff's injury, explains how the defendant caused the injury, and asks the court to order relief. A plaintiff may seek money to compensate for the injury, or may ask the court to order the defendant to stop the conduct that is causing the harm. The court may also order other types of relief, such as a declaration of the legal rights of the plaintiff in a particular situation.
To prepare a case for trial, the litigants may conduct "discovery." In discovery, the litigants must provide information to each other about the case, such as the identity of witnesses and copies of any documents related to the case. The purpose of discovery is to prepare for trial by requiring the litigants to assemble their evidence and prepare to call witnesses. Each side also may file requests, or "motions," with the court seeking rulings on the discovery of evidence, or on the procedures to be followed at trial.
One common method of discovery is the deposition. In a deposition, a witness is required to answer under oath questions about the case asked by the lawyers in the presence of a court reporter. The court reporter is a person specially trained to record all testimony and produce a word-for-word account called a transcript.
To avoid the expense and delay of having a trial, judges encourage the litigants to try to reach an agreement resolving their dispute. In particular, the courts encourage the use of mediation, arbitration, and other forms of alternative dispute resolution, or "ADR," designed to produce an early resolution of a dispute without the need for trial or other court proceedings. As a result, litigants often decide to resolve a civil lawsuit with an agreement known as a "settlement."
If a case is not settled, the court will schedule a trial. In a wide variety of civil cases, either side is entitled under the Constitution to request a jury trial. If the parties waive their right to a jury, then the case will be heard by a judge without a jury.
At a trial, witnesses testify under the supervision of a judge. By applying rules of evidence, the judge determines which information may be presented in the courtroom. To ensure that witnesses speak from their own knowledge and do not change their story based on what they hear another witness say, witnesses are kept out of the courtroom until it is time for them to testify.
A court reporter keeps a record of the trial proceedings.
A deputy clerk of court also keeps a record of each person who testifies and marks for the record any documents, photographs, or other items introduced into evidence.
As the questioning of a witness proceeds, the opposing attorney may object to a question if it invites the witness to say something that is not based on the witness's personal knowledge, is unfairly prejudicial, or is irrelevant to the case. The judge rules on the objection, generally by ruling that it is either sustained or overruled. If the objection is sustained, the witness is not required to answer the question, and the attorney must move on to his next question. The court reporter records the objections so that a court of appeals can review the arguments later if necessary.
At the conclusion of the evidence, each side gives a closing argument. In a jury trial, the judge will explain the law that is relevant to the case and the decisions the jury needs to make. The jury generally is asked to determine whether the defendant is responsible for harming the plaintiff in some way, and then to determine the amount of damages that the defendant will be required to pay. If the case is being tried before a judge without a jury, known as a "bench" trial, the judge will decide these issues. In a civil case the plaintiff must convince the jury by a "preponderance of the evidence" (i.e., that it is more likely than not) that the defendant is responsible for the harm the plaintiff has suffered.
The judicial process in a criminal case differs from a civil case in several important ways. At the beginning of a federal criminal case, the principal actors are the U.S. attorney (the prosecutor) and the grand jury. The U.S. attorney represents the United States in most court proceedings, including all criminal prosecutions. The grand jury reviews evidence presented by the U.S. attorney and decides whether there is sufficient evidence to require a defendant to stand trial.
After a person is arrested, a pretrial services or probation officer of the court immediately interviews the defendant and conducts an investigation of the defendant's background. The information obtained by the pretrial services or probation office will be used to help a judge decide whether to release the defendant into the community before trial, and whether to impose conditions of release.
At an initial appearance, a judge advises the defendant of the charges filed, considers whether the defendant should be held in jail until trial, and determines whether there is probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and the defendant has committed it. Defendants who are unable to afford counsel are advised of their right to a court-appointed attorney. The court may appoint either a federal public defender or a private attorney who has agreed to accept such appointments from the court. In either type of appointment, the attorney will be paid by the court from funds appropriated by Congress. Defendants released into the community before trial may be required to obey certain restrictions, such as home confinement or drug testing, and to make periodic reports to a pretrial services officer to ensure appearance at trial.
The defendant enters a plea to the charges brought by the U.S. attorney at a hearing known as an arraignment. Most defendants — more than 90% — plead guilty rather than go to trial. If a defendant pleads guilty in return for the government agreeing to drop certain charges or to recommend a lenient sentence, the agreement often is called a "plea bargain." If the defendant pleads guilty, the judge may impose a sentence at that time, but more commonly will schedule a hearing to determine the sentence at a later date. In most felony cases the judge waits for the results of a presentence report, prepared by the court's probation office, before imposing sentence. If the defendant pleads not guilty, the judge will proceed to schedule a trial.
Criminal cases include a limited amount of pretrial discovery proceedings similar to those in civil cases, with substantial restrictions to protect the identity of government informants and to prevent intimidation of witnesses. The attorneys also may file motions, which are requests for rulings by the court before the trial. For example, defense attorneys often file a motion to suppress evidence, which asks the court to exclude from the trial evidence that the defendant believes was obtained by the government in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights.
In a criminal trial, the burden of proof is on the government. Defendants do not have to prove their innocence. Instead, the government must provide evidence to convince the jury of the defendant's guilt. The standard of proof in a criminal trial is proof "beyond a reasonable doubt," which means the evidence must be so strong that there is no reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime.
If a defendant is found not guilty, the defendant is released and the government may not appeal. Nor can the person be charged again with the same crime in a federal court. The Constitution prohibits "double jeopardy," or being tried twice for the same offense.
If the verdict is guilty, the judge determines the defendant's sentence according to special federal sentencing guidelines issued by the United States Sentencing Commission. The court's probation office prepares a report for the court that applies the sentencing guidelines to the individual defendant and the crimes for which he or she has been found guilty. During sentencing, the court may consider not only the evidence produced at trial, but all relevant information that may be provided by the pretrial services officer, the U.S. attorney, and the defense attorney. In unusual circumstances, the court may depart from the sentence calculated according to the sentencing guidelines.
A sentence may include time in prison, a fine to be paid to the government, and restitution to be paid to crime victims. The court's probation officers assist the court in enforcing any conditions that are imposed as part of a criminal sentence. The supervision of offenders also may involve services such as substance abuse testing and treatment programs, job counseling, and alternative detention options.
Perhaps the most important way individual citizens become involved in the federal judicial process is by serving as jurors. There are two types of juries serving distinct functions in the federal trial courts: trial juries (also known as petit juries), and grand juries.
A civil trial jury is typically made up of 6 to 12 persons. In a civil case, the role of the jury is to listen to the evidence presented at a trial, to decide whether the defendant injured the plaintiff or otherwise failed to fulfill a legal duty to the plaintiff, and to determine what the compensation or penalty should be. A criminal trial jury is usually made up of 12 members. Criminal juries decide whether the defendant committed the crime as charged. The sentence usually is set by a judge. Verdicts in both civil and criminal cases must be unanimous, although the parties in a civil case may agree to a non-unanimous verdict. A jury's deliberations are conducted in private, out of sight and hearing of the judge, litigants, witnesses, and others in the courtroom.
A grand jury, which normally consists of 16 to 23 members, has a more specialized function. The United States attorney, the prosecutor in federal criminal cases, presents evidence to the grand jury for them to determine whether there is "probable cause" to believe that an individual has committed a crime and should be put on trial. If the grand jury decides there is enough evidence, it will issue an indictment against the defendant. Grand jury proceedings are not open for public observation.
Potential jurors are chosen from a jury pool generated by random selection of citizens' names from lists of registered voters, or combined lists of voters and people with drivers licenses, in the judicial district. The potential jurors complete questionnaires to help determine whether they are qualified to serve on a jury. After reviewing the questionnaires, the court randomly selects individuals to be summoned to appear for jury duty. These selection methods help ensure that jurors represent a cross section of the community, without regard to race, gender, national origin, age or political affiliation.
Being summoned for jury service does not guarantee that an individual actually will serve on a jury. When a jury is needed for a trial, the group of qualified jurors is taken to the courtroom where the trial will take place. The judge and the attorneys then ask the potential jurors questions to determine their suitability to serve on the jury, a process called voir dire. The purpose of voir dire is to exclude from the jury people who may not be able to decide the case fairly. Members of the panel who know any person involved in the case, who have information about the case, or who may have strong prejudices about the people or issues involved in the case, typically will be excused by the judge. The attorneys also may exclude a certain number of jurors without giving a reason.
Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases. This means that a bankruptcy case cannot be filed in a state court.
The primary purposes of the law of bankruptcy are: (1) to give an honest debtor a "fresh start" in life by relieving the debtor of most debts, and (2) to repay creditors in an orderly manner to the extent that the debtor has property available for payment.
A bankruptcy case normally begins by the debtor filing a petition with the bankruptcy court. A petition may be filed by an individual, by a husband and wife together, or by a corporation or other entity. The debtor is also required to file statements listing assets, income, liabilities, and the names and addresses of all creditors and how much they are owed. The filing of the petition automatically prevents, or "stays," debt collection actions against the debtor and the debtor's property. As long as the stay remains in effect, creditors cannot bring or continue lawsuits, make wage garnishments, or even make telephone calls demanding payment. Creditors receive notice from the clerk of court that the debtor has filed a bankruptcy petition. Some bankruptcy cases are filed to allow a debtor to reorganize and establish a plan to repay creditors, while other cases involve liquidation of the debtor's property. In many bankruptcy cases involving liquidation of the property of individual consumers, there is little or no money available from the debtor's estate to pay creditors. As a result, in these cases there are few issues or disputes, and the debtor is normally granted a "discharge" of most debts without objection. This means that the debtor will no longer be personally liable for repaying the debts.
In other cases, however, disputes may give rise to litigation in a bankruptcy case over such matters as who owns certain property, how it should be used, what the property is worth, how much is owed on a debt, whether the debtor should be discharged from certain debts, or how much money should be paid to lawyers, accountants, auctioneers, or other professionals. Litigation in the bankruptcy court is conducted in much the same way that civil cases are handled in the district court. There may be discovery, pretrial proceedings, settlement efforts, and a trial.
The losing party in a decision by a trial court in the federal system normally is entitled to appeal the decision to a federal court of appeals. Similarly, a litigant who is not satisfied with a decision made by a federal administrative agency usually may file a petition for review of the agency decision by a court of appeals. Judicial review in cases involving certain federal agencies or programs — for example, disputes over Social Security benefits — may be obtained first in a district court rather than directly to a court of appeals.
In a civil case either side may appeal the verdict. In a criminal case, the defendant may appeal a guilty verdict, but the government may not appeal if a defendant is found not guilty. Either side in a criminal case may appeal with respect to the sentence that is imposed after a guilty verdict.
In most bankruptcy courts, an appeal of a ruling by a bankruptcy judge may be taken to the district court. Several courts of appeals, however, have established a Bankruptcy Appellate Panel consisting of three bankruptcy judges to hear appeals directly from the bankruptcy courts. In either situation, the party that loses in the initial bankruptcy appeal may then appeal to the court of appeals.
A litigant who files an appeal, known as an "appellant," must show that the trial court or administrative agency made a legal error that affected the decision in the case. The court of appeals makes its decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court or agency. It does not receive additional evidence or hear witnesses. The court of appeals also may review the factual findings of the trial court or agency, but typically may only overturn a decision on factual grounds if the findings were "clearly erroneous."
Appeals are decided by panels of three judges working together. The appellant presents legal arguments to the panel, in writing, in a document called a "brief." In the brief, the appellant tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that its decision should be reversed. On the other hand, the party defending against the appeal, known as the "appellee," tries in its brief to show why the trial court decision was correct, or why any error made by the trial court was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.
Although some cases are decided on the basis of written briefs alone, many cases are selected for an "oral argument" before the court. Oral argument in the court of appeals is a structured discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles in dispute. Each side is given a short time — usually about 15 minutes — to present arguments to the court.
The court of appeals decision usually will be the final word in the case, unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. In some cases the decision may be reviewed en banc, that is, by a larger group of judges (usually all) of the court of appeals for the circuit.
A litigant who loses in a federal court of appeals, or in the highest court of a state, may file a petition for a "writ of certiorari," which is a document asking the Supreme Court to review the case. The Supreme Court, however, does not have to grant review. The Court typically will agree to hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently. There are also a small number of special circumstances in which the Supreme Court is required by law to hear an appeal. When the Supreme Court hears a case, the parties are required to file written briefs and the Court may hear oral argument.
The day-to-day responsibility for judicial administration rests with each individual court. Each court is given the responsibility by statute and administrative practice to appoint support staff, supervise spending, and manage the court's records.
The chief judge of each court plays a key leadership role in overseeing and coordinating the efficient operations of the court. Although the chief judge is generally responsible for overseeing day-to-day court administration, important policy decisions are made by the judges of the court working together.
The primary administrative officer of each court is the clerk of court. The clerk manages the court's non-judicial functions in accordance with policies set by the court, and reports directly to the court through its chief judge. Among the clerk's many functions are:
Maintaining the records and dockets of the court
Paying all fees, fines, costs and other monies collected into the U.S. Treasury
Administering the court's jury system
Providing interpreters and court reporters
Sending official court notices and summons
Providing courtroom support services
At the regional level, a "circuit judicial council" in each circuit oversees the administration of the courts located in its geographic circuit. Each circuit judicial council consists of the chief circuit judge, who serves as the chair, and an equal number of other circuit and district judges.
The judicial council oversees numerous aspects of court of appeals and district court operations. It is authorized by statute to issue orders to promote accountability and the "effective and expeditious administration of justice within its circuit." Aside from its fundamental responsibility to ensure that individual courts are operating effectively, the judicial council is responsible for reviewing local court rules for consistency with national rules of procedure, approving district court plans on topics such as equal employment opportunity and jury selection, and reviewing complaints of judicial misconduct. Each judicial council appoints a "circuit executive," who works closely with the chief circuit judge to coordinate a wide range of administrative matters in the circuit.
The Judicial Conference of the United States is the federal courts' national policy-making body. The Chief Justice of the United States presides over the Judicial Conference, which consists of 26 other members including the chief judge of each court of appeals, one district court judge from each regional circuit, and the chief judge of the Court of International Trade. The Judicial Conference works through committees established along subject matter lines to recommend national policies and legislation on all aspects of federal judicial administration. Committees include budget, rules of practice and procedure, court administration and case management, criminal law, bankruptcy, judicial resources (judgeships and personnel matters), information technology, and codes of conduct.
The Administrative Office provides a broad range of legislative, legal, financial, technology, management, administrative, and program support services to the federal courts. The Administrative Office, an agency within the judicial branch, is responsible for carrying out the policies of the Judicial Conference of the United States. A primary responsibility of the Administrative Office is to provide staff support and counsel to the Judicial Conference and its committees. The numerous responsibilities of the Administrative Office also include: collecting and reporting judicial branch statistics, developing budgets, conducting studies and assessments of judiciary operations and programs, providing technical assistance to the courts, developing training programs, and fostering communications within the judiciary and with other branches of government and the public.
The Director of the Administrative Office, who is appointed by the Chief Justice in consultation with the Judicial Conference, serves as the chief administrative officer of the federal courts. Congress has vested many of the judiciary's administrative responsibilities in the Director. Recognizing, however, that the courts can make better business decisions based on local needs, the Director in the last few years has delegated the responsibility for many administrative matters to the individual courts. This concept, known as "decentralization," allows each court to operate with considerable autonomy and sound management principles in accordance with policies and guidelines set at the regional and national level.
The Federal Judicial Center provides training and research for the federal judiciary in a wide range of areas including court administration, case management, budget and finance, human resources, and court technology. It develops orientation and continuing education programs for judges and other court personnel, including seminars, curriculum materials for use by individual courts, monographs and manuals, and audio, video, and interactive media programs. The Center conducts studies of judiciary operations, and makes recommendations to the Judicial Conference for improvement of the administration and management of the federal courts. The Center's operations are overseen by a board of directors consisting of the Chief Justice, the Director of the Administrative Office, and seven judges chosen by the Judicial Conference.
The Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation has the authority to transfer cases that are pending in different districts but involve common questions of fact (for example, mass tort actions arising from airplane crashes, breast implants, or asbestos) to a single district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings. The Panel consists of seven court of appeals and district court judges designated by the Chief Justice.
The U.S. Sentencing Commission establishes sentencing guidelines for the federal criminal justice system. The Commission also monitors the performance of probation officers with regard to sentencing recommendations, and has established a research program that includes a clearinghouse and information center on federal sentencing practices. The Sentencing Commission consists of a chairman, three vice chairs, and three other voting commissioners who are appointed for six-year terms by the President.
In recognition of the constitutional separation of powers among the three branches of the federal government, Congress has given the judiciary authority to prepare and execute its own budget. The Administrative Office, in consultation with the courts and with various Judicial Conference committees, prepares a proposed budget for the judiciary for each fiscal year. The proposal is reviewed and approved by the Judicial Conference and is submitted to the Congress with detailed justifications. By law, the President must include in his budget to Congress the judiciary's budget proposal without change. The appropriation committees of the Congress conduct hearings at which judges and the Director of the Administrative Office frequently present and justify the judiciary's projected expenditures.
After Congress enacts a budget for the judiciary, the Judicial Conference approves a plan to spend the money, and the Administrative Office distributes funds directly to each court, operating unit, and program in the judiciary. Individual courts have considerable authority and flexibility to conduct their work, establish budget priorities, make sound business decisions, hire staff, and make purchases, consistent with Judicial Conference policies.
How do I file a civil case? Is there a charge?
A civil action is commenced by the filing of a complaint. Parties instituting a civil action in a district court are required to pay a filing fee pursuant to Title 28, U.S. Code, Section 1914. The current fee is $350. Complaints may be accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning that the plaintiff is incapable of paying the filing fee. Proceedings in forma pauperis are governed by Title 28, U.S. Code, Section 1915.
How do I file a criminal case?
Individuals may not file criminal charges in federal courts. A criminal proceeding is initiated by the government, usually through the U.S. attorney's office in coordination with a law enforcement agency. Allegations of criminal behavior should be brought to the local police, the FBI, or other appropriate law enforcement agency.
How do I file for bankruptcy protection? Is there a charge?
A bankruptcy case is begun by the filing of a petition. The required forms are available from the bankruptcy court clerk's office or at many stationery stores. There is a range of filing fees for bankruptcy cases, depending on the chapter of the bankruptcy code under which the case is filed. Chapter 7, the most common type filed by individuals, involves an almost complete liquidation of the assets of the debtor, as well as a discharge of most debts.
How can I find a lawyer?
Local bar associations usually offer lawyer referral services, often without charge. The clerk's office in each district court usually is able to help find a referral service. But personnel in the clerk's office and other federal court employees are prohibited from providing legal advice to individual litigants.
Defendants in criminal proceedings have a right to a lawyer, and they are entitled to have counsel appointed at government expense if they are financially unable to obtain adequate representation by private counsel. The Criminal Justice Act requires a court determination that a person is financially eligible for court-appointed counsel. Defendants may be required to pay some of these costs.
There is no general right to free legal assistance in civil proceedings. Some litigants obtain free or low-cost representation through local bar association referrals, or through legal services organizations. Litigants in civil cases may also proceed pro se; that is, they may represent themselves without the assistance of a lawyer.
How are judges assigned to a particular court?
Each federal judge is commissioned to a specific court. Judges have no authority to hear cases in other courts unless they are formally designated to do so. Because of heavy caseloads in certain districts, judges from other courts are often asked to hear cases in these districts.
How are judges assigned to specific cases?
Judge assignment methods vary, but the basic considerations in making assignments are to assure an equitable distribution of caseload among judges and to avoid "judge shopping." The majority of courts use some variation of a random drawing under which each judge in a court receives roughly an equal caseload.
What is a U.S. Magistrate Judge?
Magistrate judges are appointed by the district court to serve for eight-year terms. Their duties fall into four general categories: conducting most of the initial proceedings in criminal cases (including search and arrest warrants, detention hearings, probable cause hearings, and appointment of attorneys); trial of certain criminal misdemeanor cases; trial of civil cases with the consent of the parties; and conducting a wide variety of other proceedings referred to them by district judges (including deciding motions, reviewing petitions filed by prisoners, and conducting pretrial and settlement conferences).
How can I check on the status of a case?
The clerk's office responds without charge to most inquiries on the status of a case. There is a fee to conduct certain searches and retrieve some information, and to make copies of court documents. Most federal courts have automated systems that allow for the search and retrieval of case-related information at the public counters in the courthouse, and electronically from other locations. In many bankruptcy and appellate courts, telephone information systems enable callers to obtain case information by touch-tone phone. Court dockets and opinions may also be available on the Internet. The federal judiciary's Internet homepage, www.uscourts.gov, includes links to individual court websites, as well as a directory of court electronic public access services.
How quickly does a court reach a decision in a particular case?
All cases are handled as expeditiously as possible. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 establishes special time requirements for the prosecution and disposition of criminal cases in district courts. As a result, courts must give the scheduling of criminal cases a higher priority than civil cases. The Act normally allows only 70 days from a defendant's arrest to the beginning of the trial.
There is no similar law governing civil trial scheduling, but on average the courts are able to resolve most civil cases in less than a year. Depending on its complexity, a particular case may require more or less time to address. There are numerous reasons why the progress of a particular case may be delayed, many of which are outside the court's control. Cases may be delayed because settlement negotiations are in progress, or because there are shortages in judges or available courtrooms.
How are staff hired in the federal courts?
The federal court system's personnel decisions are decentralized. This means that each court conducts its own advertising and hiring for job positions. Judges select and hire their own chambers staff. The clerk of court and certain other central court staff are hired by the court as a whole. Other court staff are hired by the clerk of court, who acts under the supervision of the court. Some employment opportunities are listed on the judiciary's Internet homepage, www.uscourts.gov, but often the clerk's office or Internet website of a particular court is the best source for a complete listing. The federal judiciary is committed to the national policy of ensuring equal employment opportunity to all persons.