H.R. 1702, JUDGES Act

Bill Summary

H.R. 1702 would permanently authorize 65 new district court judgeships and authorize 1 judgeship for a five-year appointment. The bill would add new judgeships every two years from 2025 through 2035.

The bill also would authorize appropriations for the administrative costs of the affected district courts. Finally, H.R. 1702 would reorganize certain judicial districts in California, Texas, and Utah and would require the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to report to the Congress.

Estimated Federal Cost

The estimated budgetary effect of H.R. 1702 is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration of justice).

Basis of Estimate

For this estimate, CBO assumes that the legislation will be enacted in fiscal year 2025 and that the authorized and estimated amounts will be provided in each year beginning in 2025. Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns for the affected activities.

Direct Spending

The compensation (that is, salary and benefits) of judges in federal district courts is classified as direct spending in the federal budget. In 2024, the average compensation for each judge was $270,000. Using information from the AOUSC about past and projected pay increases, CBO estimates that compensation costs for each new judge would be $280,000 in 2025 and would rise to $335,000 in 2035. Based on the time required for Congressional confirmations of judges in recent years and the schedule specified in the bill, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1702 would increase direct spending by $111 million over the 2025-2035 period.

Spending Subject to Appropriation

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1702 would cost $79 million over the 2025-2030 period and $283 million over the 2025-2035 period for administrative expenses and other costs. Any related spending would be subject to the appropriation of the necessary funds.

Administrative expenses. The bill would authorize the appropriation of specific amounts each year through 2035 for administrative expenses, including compensation for staff and overhead for facilities, security, and technology. The bill would further authorize those amounts to increase each year by the percentage increase in inflation in the previous year. Using the inflation projections that underlie CBO’s baseline, we estimate that the bill would authorize appropriations totaling $397 million over the 2025-2035 period. Based on the expected costs for staff and other administrative expenses, CBO expects that the courts will not need the full amounts that would be authorized in the bill.

Using information from the AOUSC about district courts’ typical administrative costs, CBO estimates that the cost of the first year of operation for a new court would average $760,000, and that, once fully established, each new court would operate at an average annual cost of about $700,000 over the 2025-2030 period. CBO expects that the costs of operating the new courts would rise over time as more judgeships are authorized and staffed and to accommodate pay increases and inflation. In total, CBO estimates that operating the new courts would cost $282 million over the 2025-2035 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.

Other costs. Additionally, H.R. 1702 would require GAO to report to the Congress on judiciary caseloads and federal agencies’ need for detention space. Using information about the cost of similar reports, CBO estimates that the report would cost $1 million over the 2025-2030 period.

Finally, H.R. 1702 also would reorganize certain districts in California and Texas by adding localities to their jurisdictions. The AOUSC would be required to report every two years detailing the recommendations and methodology used by the Judicial Conference of the United States for judicial nominations. Using information from the AOUSC, CBO estimates that the costs of implementing those provisions would not be significant.

Any spending related to the reports would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.

Pay-As-You-Go Considerations

The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in Table 1.

Increase in Long-Term Net Direct Spending and Deficits

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1702 would not increase net direct spending by more than $2.5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1702 would not increase on‑budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

Mandates

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

Federal Costs: Jon Sperl

Mandates: Grace Watson

Estimate Reviewed By

Justin Humphrey
Chief, Finance, Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit

Kathleen FitzGerald 
Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit

H. Samuel Papenfuss 
Deputy Director of Budget Analysis