MOSCOW, March 21 – RAPSI, Ingrid Burke. Leading federal judges warned the US Congress Wednesday of the dire impact sequestration will have on the nation’s federal court system, claiming in a congressional testimony that the federal spending cuts threaten to compromise the courts’ constitutional mission.
The sequester
Several months of incessant grappling over partisan budget cuts between Congress’ Democrats and Republicans culminated on March 1 in a sequestration order, which called for arbitrary, across the board budget cuts in the amount of $85 billion.
The 2013 sequestration was born of the failure of the two parties to reach an agreement.
US President Barrack Obama placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of Congress Republicans. He did not mince words in a bitter statement released by the White House the day the cuts took effect: “Today, Republicans in the Senate faced a choice about how to grow our economy and reduce our deficit. And instead of closing a single tax loophole that benefits the well-off and well-connected, they chose to cut vital services for children, seniors, our men and women in uniform and their families. They voted to let the entire burden of deficit reduction fall squarely on the middle class.”
The Republicans saw things differently.
That same day, Republican House Speaker John Boehner blamed Obama for the destructive cuts in a statement: “[To] my dismay, the sequester – a series of mandatory spending cuts proposed [by] the White House during the debt ceiling talks of 2011 – went into place as scheduled. And it will be here to stay until the President and the Democratic-controlled Senate decide to join us in focusing on more responsible spending cuts to replace it.”
Boehner excoriated Obama and Washington Democrats for leaning on tax hikes as the only viable alternative to the sequester.
While blame for the ordeal has been scattered freely across Washington, the fact of the sequester remains, and its impact has the potential to prove devastating, as evidenced by the congressional testimony given by leading federal judges Tuesday.
Compromising the mandate of the federal courts
Judge Julia Gibbons, chairwoman of the US Judicial Conference – the body that creates US federal court policy – summarized the cuts required to be taken by courts in accordance with sequestration as follows: “These actions are unsustainable, difficult, and painful to implement. Indeed, the Judiciary cannot continue to operate at sequestration funding levels without seriously compromising the Constitutional mission of the federal courts.”
In her concluding remarks, Gibbons reminded Congress that it remains a co-equal partner in the US system of checks and balances. By design, each branch of the federal government – legislative, judicial, and executive – is empowered by its own unique mandate to keep the other two branches under control.
Judge Thomas Hogan, Director of the Administrative Office of the US Courts – the central support entity for the US judiciary – testified to further damage that the judiciary would endure if sequestration cuts are left unabated, explaining that his office would be ill equipped to provide the resources necessary to keep the courts strong.
Earlier this month, the Judicial Conference warned that the impact on the courts would be devastating, noting that it would take a toll on public safety due to a decreased number of probation officers; cases would be delayed due to a decreased staff numbers; court security would suffer for the same reason; the number of public federal defenders would diminish; and IT programs utilized by courts would suffer deep cuts.
