Committee advances Judges Act to add 66 district judgeships; bipartisan authors urge quick action

Representative Darrell Issa, who introduced the Judges Act of 2025, told the Judiciary Committee the bill would implement the Judicial Conference's recommendations by creating 66 new U.S. district judgeships in overburdened districts and authorize additional courthouse locations in large jurisdictions. "The Judges Act of 2025 enacts the recommendations of the Judicial Conference, creating 66 new district court judges in our most overburdened districts," Issa said during his opening remarks, urging members to consider the bill on its institutional merits rather than partisan grounds.

Issa and other supporters said the proposal staggers appointments across multiple presidential terms and congresses to avoid immediate partisan advantage. The measure would require the Judicial Conference to publish the methodology behind its judgeship recommendations and direct the Government Accountability Office to evaluate appellate and district court efficiency and related detention needs. "With a discretionary cost of less than 5% of the federal judiciary annual budget, this legislation is prudent and essential," Issa said.

Democrats on the committee said they supported adding judgeships but complained the House GOP leadership in the prior Congress delayed a bipartisan deal that would have spread appointments over multiple administrations starting with the next unknown president. Ranking Member Hank Johnson urged the committee to restore the prior bipartisan timetable; he and other Democrats pressed for amendments that would reinstate the earlier bipartisan distribution of appointments so no party had a timing advantage.

Committee members debated amendments addressing timing, geographic distribution of seats, and procedural protections such as the blue-slip tradition for district-court nominees. Members from districts with acute backlogs described the human and economic costs of delays and urged swift confirmation of additional judges. Representative Maxwell Nels (remarks summarized) and others described their districts' heavy civil and criminal dockets and the need for more courtroom locations.

The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute to update the bill's title and made other technical changes. The markup concluded with a recorded vote to report the bill favorably to the House; the clerk recorded the final tally in the transcript as 14 ayes and 11 noes and the chair ordered the bill reported to the House.

Ending: Committee members said they would continue to refine placement and timing details as the bill moves to the House floor and to coordinate with Senate counterparts on a bipartisan path to enactment.