[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},"mediaId",6513326,"mediaKeyId","5071387-269238d1b9fc8d5fb7486f304e4bd689","parentId",5071387,"title","Members debate impeachment threats, nationwide injunctions and judicial independence at oversight hearing","audioSeconds",1650,"startMs",3223000,"endMs",4873000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5071387-269238d1b9fc8d5fb7486f304e4bd689&start=3223&end=4873","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5071387-269238d1b9fc8d5fb7486f304e4bd689/thumbnail_3223000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6513326/Members-debate-impeachment-threats-nationwide-injunctions-and-judicial-independence-at-oversight-hearing","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6513326-e6fe3648b047cbe0067ce0fed80c9acc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181938&Signature=EkcnmO~Loc-5AFDnuLnIu1MhonEzLEpxaL0g7JkWjI34eyyW1YCIVsVVjPH0gI1CsRaKsCX-g48~0YceVn4tY7aX7Wh00EzwUGVnpF7AG1KfLa1maf3Qp~8ILXi9V4dGUU~FThA1rT~2bzXy82S95HCtvW76NaSt4UcJ6lzxj77Op5QcFmMjrT7tqfdn6CvsEbGoB6LdQ4LKeULh8BcZRF3LSpEokC30Db7ZVPXkirQUNAujPfkh-BX-lp149c620cewzVVB9UnNBcKKGf0fEGiaEHZfA13Ns5eVJrBXZcZjkfGK5WdpePWqEottOxbBRmSArwP-JmUlJ9yYroXN3A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary","date","2025-06-24T16:07:07Z","article","Members of the House Judiciary subcommittee used a hearing on the judiciary's budget to press broader concerns about judicial independence, impeachment threats and the use of nationwide injunctions.

\"Impeachment is a very serious process,\" Representative Zoe Lofgren said during questioning, urging that impeachment not be used as a political weapon against judges who issue rulings some members dislike. \"Impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate process exists for that purpose.\"

Ranking Member Jamie Raskin and other Democrats warned that public attacks on judges and calls for impeachment have contributed to a rise in threats and risk to judicial safety. \"Threats to federal judges skyrocketed over the last 6 months,\" Raskin said, citing U.S. Marshals Service figures shared in committee discussion.

Several Republican members framed nationwide injunctions and certain district‑court rulings as examples of judicial overreach and said reforms or clearer limits could be needed. Witnesses from the Judicial Conference said the conference does not have an official policy on nationwide injunctions and noted the issue is before the Supreme Court.

Judge Amy St. Eve said she had not prepared to comment on the merits of nationwide injunctions and that judicial conference committees appearing before the panel had not adopted a position. Judge Michael Scudder said legal arguments on the subject are \"before the Supreme Court,\" and the conference would expect guidance from that court.

Members also discussed whether congressional leverage over funding could be used to influence judicial behavior. Several witnesses and members rejected using appropriations to coerce decisions. Representative Raskin warned that withholding resources for judicial security would threaten the independence necessary for judges to rule without fear.

Witnesses repeatedly emphasized the distinction between criticism of rulings and attacks that create safety risks for judges and their families. \"We must give judicial branch institutions all the security funding they need wholly without regard to which judges are being protected, in which cases they may be handling,\" Ranking Member Johnson said in an opening statement that the witnesses echoed.

The committee did not take formal action on impeachment or rules governing injunctions; the hearing record closed with members requesting additional information from the witnesses.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Fiscal Accountability and Oversight of the Federal Courts","oneSentenceSummary","Lawmakers and judicial witnesses debated rising rhetoric against judges, the use of impeachment threats, and the controversy over nationwide injunctions. Witnesses said the Judicial Conference has not taken formal positions on nationwide injunctions or structural changes to marshals appointments.","taxTitle","Judiciary: House Committee, Standing Committees - House & Senate, Congressional Hearings Compilation, Legislative, Federal","taxId",1830,"location","","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":72,"_74":72},6513331,"Judicial leaders ask Congress for $9.4 billion, warn of rising cyberattacks and defender funding shortfall",2584,1956000,4540000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5071387-269238d1b9fc8d5fb7486f304e4bd689&start=1956&end=4540","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5071387-269238d1b9fc8d5fb7486f304e4bd689/thumbnail_1956000.jpg","/articles/6513331/Judicial-leaders-ask-Congress-for-94-billion-warn-of-rising-cyberattacks-and-defender-funding-shortfall","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6513331-b3667eb9f0a6bcd28b1847923efd3313/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181938&Signature=jR7dF2AI75MfL-3nc8nJ9JNBecLKprdGzhWkapUydB2VU5vPKKV04Z7BlAFS~LD9pjw0EVGflTzsHKEXow1m-hn7jOFnnJHcLnwwC88y4NseBuxm2YOXZZ9k2YDMelC63aJta46VYEHkCVTpkpCfsnS2fyNhWB9-a3hf-TDKxjfJGaByIma50qGzIklJ7l96awJzXWMVWf2yagC3fleN18qJryDX~-UnH36LtDZpWngybLZfX6Cxzx7053FUaHHaf9G4Xx3wapZJOyUWKUaI5KCVJCmV31JbW3CcQQXPYozsFzwrsmmFpuHTQFnboN-IatFK~OlA1sIItIwIFzQnHw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Judicial Conference witnesses told a House subcommittee on oversight of the federal courts that the judiciary is seeking $9.4 billion for fiscal year 2026 to shore up court security, modernize aging information technology and restore payments to attorneys who represent indigent defendants.

\"An effective and efficient judiciary is foundational to our system of government. Adequate and consistent funding is absolutely critical to conduct our constitutional and statutory responsibilities,\" Judge Amy St. Eve said, testifying as chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on the Budget.

The request includes roughly $6.9 billion for courts and probation/pretrial services, $1.8 billion for defender services and about $892 million for the court security program, St. Eve said. She told the panel that more than 85% of the proposed increase for courts and probation reflects adjustments to maintain current services, with the remainder for staffing, space and IT investments.

\"In that CR, every component of the branch was held to its fiscal year 24 enacted funding level regardless of changing requirements, and for most of our accounts, this is the second straight year of a freeze,\" St. Eve said, referring to the continuing resolution that held funding flat for much of the judiciary.

Judge Michael Scudder, who chairs the Judicial Conference Committee on Information Technology, told members that recent breaches and a ransomware attack on a federal public defender's office show the judiciary faces persistent and growing cyber threats. \"Cyber risk is very real for the federal judiciary. Malicious individuals and groups look to exploit vulnerabilities in our environment for their own benefit and to destabilize confidence in our branch,\" he said.

Scudder described a multiyear IT modernization and cybersecurity effort that the judiciary began after prior breaches and urged continued congressional support for $74 million requested for a multi‑year plan to modernize systems.

Members pressed witnesses on how funds are prioritized and audited. St. Eve said the Administrative Office conducts internal audits and that outside accounting firms perform cyclical accounting reviews of districts and circuits. She said the judiciary has prioritized court security officers and a vulnerability‑management program that helps remove judges' personal identifying information from the internet, but that equipment replacements have been delayed by funding freezes: \"Some equipment is on a 10 year cycle where it should be replaced, and that equipment is now on an 18 year cycle because we haven't been able to replace it.\"

Lawmakers also raised the prospect that a midyear funding shortfall could halt reimbursements to Criminal Justice Act (CJA) attorneys who accept court appointments. St. Eve told the committee that payments to private attorneys were suspended for almost three months as a result of the fiscal 2025 continuing resolution, and that CJA reimbursement funds could be exhausted within weeks absent action.

Witnesses and members discussed PACER (the Public Access to Court Electronic Records) and whether revenues from electronic access should be restructured to finance modernization. St. Eve said PACER receipts are governed by statute and are invested back into the system; Scudder said the branch is pursuing an enterprise‑wide approach to reduce local customizations and improve security.

Members and witnesses also debated judicial security governance. Several members expressed concern about threats to judges and families after high‑profile rhetoric; judges praised U.S. Marshals Service protection and urged steady funding. One member referenced draft legislation to shift appointment authority for U.S. marshals to the chief justice so that the judiciary would have greater control of surge security — witnesses said the Judicial Conference had not taken an institutional position on that structural proposal and that marshals currently are \"incredibly professional and responsive.\"

St. Eve said the judiciary's fiscal request funds contractual obligations to court security officers, recapitalization of equipment and expansion of the vulnerability‑management program, and includes roughly $19 million to fully fund juror requirements for the year. Scudder said the judicial branch has made cybersecurity a top priority and is coordinating with FBI, CISA and the national cyber director on threat intelligence.

Committee members asked whether the judiciary is exploring AI carefully; Scudder said the conference has a task force and that \"any use of AI require[s] caution and humility,\" echoing the chief justice's guidance.

The hearing closed with committee leaders asking the witnesses for written follow‑up. Witnesses pledged to provide additional details and to accept written questions for the record.","Judicial Conference witnesses told a House subcommittee the judiciary needs $9.4 billion for fiscal 2026 to address court security, cybersecurity, public defender pay and courthouse maintenance, and warned that funding freezes have deferred security projects and paused payments to private defense counsel.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Members debate impeachment threats, nationwide injunctions and judicial independence at oversight hearing

Judicial leaders ask Congress for $9.4 billion, warn of rising cyberattacks and defender funding shortfall