Federal Judiciary Emergency Special Sessions Act of 2005

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3650) to allow United States courts to conduct business during emergency conditions, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 3650.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, every Member of this body is aware of the scope of the tragedy and destruction that Hurricane Katrina inflicted on the gulf coast region, and Congress has already taken several steps to bring relief to the affected States and their people. In addition to the thousands of private residences and businesses destroyed or rendered uninhabitable by the hurricane and subsequent floods, many entities of the Federal Government located in that region may not be able to operate for a time period that remains uncertain.

The creation and maintenance of a court system that allows citizens to adjudicate disputes is a fundamental responsibility of government. The purpose of H.R. 3650 is to authorize Federal courts to conduct business outside of their statutorily defined geographic domains during times of emergency. It is critical that Congress enact the legislation expeditiously so that the affected courts in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama may continue to function in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

The text of H.R. 3650 is substantially similar to section 15 of H.R. 1751, the Secure Access to Justice and Court Restoration Act of 2005, which the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security reported to the full Committee on the Judiciary on June 30.

Mr. Speaker, the need for this legislation became tragically apparent following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the impact of these disasters on court operations, particularly in New York City. In emergency conditions, a Federal court facility in an adjoining district or circuit might more readily and safely be available to court personnel, litigants, jurors, and the public than a facility at the place of holding court within the district. This is especially true in major metropolitan areas such as New York, Washington, D.C., Dallas, and Kansas City, where the metropolitan area includes parts of more than one judicial district.

This legislation is also needed to address natural disasters. The recent impact of Hurricane Katrina on the Federal courts in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama has increased the urgency of congressional action. Where court operations cannot be transferred to other divisions within the affected judicial district due to widespread flooding and destruction, judges must be empowered to shift court proceedings temporarily into a neighboring judicial district.

The advent of electronic court record systems will facilitate the implementation of this authority by providing judges, court staff, and attorneys with remote access to case documents. The bill authorizes circuit, district, and bankruptcy courts that conduct special sessions outside of their respective geographic boundaries upon a finding that because of emergency conditions, no locations within the boundaries of those courts are reasonably available where such special sessions could be held.

The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, or AO, is required to notify the House and Senate Committees on the Judiciary, as well as the Marshals Service when a court issues an order to conduct an emergency session. The AO must also follow up no later than 180 days after such an order expires by submitting a brief report to both committees summarizing why the order was issued, its duration, its impact on litigants, and its cost to the judiciary.

The bill specifies that criminal trials may not be conducted outside the State in which a crime has been committed unless a defendant otherwise consents. This is consistent with the provisions of article III of the Constitution and the sixth amendment. With this one exception, a Federal court is empowered to conduct all business in a special session outside a district that it might otherwise conduct during a regular session.

Given these constitutional constraints, however, jurors in criminal

trials may only be summoned from ``any part of the district in which the crime has been committed,'' unless a defendant agrees to be tried by jurors from the district in which the court is holding a special session.

Finally, United States magistrate judges are currently subject to certain territorial limitations on their powers imposed by the Federal Magistrates Act. The bill clarifies that magistrate judges can also participate in the emergency extraterritorial sessions of the district courts.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation to return a measure of continuity to the victims of Hurricane Katrina and the Federal Court system that serves them.

Mr. Speaker, I submit for the Record a letter from the Justice Department in support of this legislation.

Department of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs,

Office of the Assistant Attorney General

Washington, DC, September 7, 2005.

Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner,

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to express the views of the

Department on H.R. 3650, ``The Federal Emergency Special

Sessions Act of 2005.'' We support swift enactment of this

legislation.

This bill is drawn from other legislation currently being

considered in the Congress that will permit Federal courts to

conduct business in other locations in the event of an

emergency situation. The need for this bill has been clearly

demonstrated by the recent catastrophe caused by Hurricane

Katrina, which has already caused extreme disruption to the

courts. Passing this bill on an emergency basis will permit

the Federal Courts to return to the Nation's critical

business more quickly and more easily.

The Department already has commented on similar provisions

in prior legislation and some of our prior comments have been

addressed in this bill. In future legislation, we will

continue to seek refinement of the law in this area,

particularly as it relates to the critical need for

consultation and coordination between the Judiciary and the

Marshals Service in the event of any serious emergency.

Thank you for the opportunity to express our views. The

Office of Management and Budget has advised us that from the

perspective of the Administration's program, there is no

objection to submission of this letter.

Sincerely,

William E. Moschella,

Assistant Attorney General.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I think that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) makes a good point relative to the reimbursement of travel and subsistence expenses of parties, particularly those who may be indigent, and I think that we ought to look at this issue as time progresses, basically in seeing how far away criminal trials have to be moved away from New Orleans and the other places on the gulf coast where the courts are either impaired or not able to function in their chosen venues.

However, I would point out that the Office of General Counsel For the Administrative Office of the Courts advises that jurors may obtain reimbursement for mileage, subsistence, and lodging expenses under this bill just as they may under normal circumstances. Similarly, there is the payment of travel and subsistence expenses for witnesses who will be available during the emergency special sessions under the bill.

As far as the parties are concerned, particularly the indigent ones, I can give the gentleman from Michigan my assurance that we all will continue to work with the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, the appropriators, and the Senate on this point. I think the thing that we have got to do now is to get this bill enacted into law as quickly as possible so that the courts can be up and running to do their business even though their current facilities may still be under water.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the chair of the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I seek recognition to support legislation that is urgently needed in light of the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. This legislation would authorize Federal circuit, district, and bankruptcy courts to conduct special sessions outside their respective boundaries in times of emergency. Currently there is no authority in the law for Federal courts to hold session beyond their geographical districts.

The need for such authority initially became apparent following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Those attacks seriously impaired Federal court operations in New York City at the time. Court facilities available in nearby districts, such as New Jersey, could have alleviated the disruption in court services, but the authority provided in this legislation did not exist.

The recent impact of Hurricane Katrina on the Federal courts in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi has heightened the urgency of congressional action on this proposal. When emergencies, whether they be natural disasters or terrorist attacks, make shifting court operations to other court facilities within the affected district impossible, a Federal court facility in an adjoining district or circuit might be more readily and safely available to court personnel, litigants, jurors, and the public.

The widespread flooding and vast destruction caused by Hurricane Katrina has created precisely this scenario. All of the Federal court facilities in the Eastern District of Louisiana are severely damaged and will not be available for a significant period of time. Courthouses have roof and window damage, extensive water infiltration, and no electrical power. Senior court management are meeting in Lafayette to discuss finding viable and possibly long-term alternative sites for court operations for that entire district, but such alternative sites most certainly must be outside the geographical boundaries of that district.

Federal courts in the Middle and Western Districts of Louisiana are expected to remain open for business and possibly could provide temporary courtroom facilities, and the judiciary will be exploring these and other possibilities if given the authority proposed in this bill.

In the Southern District of Alabama, seawater has flooded the basement of the Mobile, AL, courthouse, and debris is scattered throughout the grounds. The court does not know when that facility will become operational again, and this court too, may have to be temporarily relocated outside of the district. Similarly, in the Southern District of Mississippi, seawater has flooded the Gulfport facility, and communications and electrical power are down. Court operations in the Gulfport area have been shifted within that district to the court facility in Jackson, MS.

The Fifth Circuit operations in New Orleans are completely closed and will

remain so for the foreseeable future. In the meantime, the judiciary has undertaken efforts to determine how much of the Fifth Circuit operations in New Orleans can be shifted within the circuit to Houston, and for what period of time.

The Federal courts in these areas devastated by Hurricane Katrina simply must be able to shift court proceedings temporarily into a neighboring district. Without this legislation, the Federal criminal justice system risks grounding to a protracted halt throughout the gulf region at a time when it is needed most. This legislation is needed now to avoid undue delay in bringing criminals to swift justice and resolving civil matters important to private citizens, especially bankruptcy proceedings in anticipation of an increase in bankruptcy filings in Hurricane Katrina's wake.

The need for this bill was brought to my attention by Judge Edward Becker of the Third Circuit and his colleagues at the Administrative Office of the Federal Courts and it enjoys their strong support. This bill is supported by my Democratic colleague, Senator Leahy, as well as Senators from the States ravaged by Hurricane Katrina. Since this bill is noncontroversial and clearly urgent, it is my hope that it can be passed by unanimous consent before the end of business today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I, too, Mr. Speaker, join the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary in rising in support of this legislation. One of the many effects of the terrible tragedy resulting from Hurricane Katrina, one of the worst in our history, is the problem that the Federal courthouses in the region are flooded, preventing countless civil and criminal cases from proceeding. This legislation would permit the circuit courts, the district courts, magistrates, and the bankruptcy courts to all conduct proceedings outside their normal jurisdictions in times of emergency. These courts are, in many instances, closed as we meet today in Washington.

Terrorist attacks and natural disasters can render unusable the Federal courthouses. Along with the tragic humanitarian results of such events, the administration of justice would come to a halt, preventing citizens from exercising their rights in court. In such circumstances, the chief judge of the court or judicial council of the circuit court could order the court proceedings to be conducted at any other place within the United States.

Upon such an order, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts would notify Congress of the reasons. Also, within 180 days of the termination of the special session, the Administrative Office would notify us of the order's duration, its impact on litigants, and the cost to the judiciary.

This bill, H.R. 3650, further provides that jurors for civil cases may come from either the original or the temporary jurisdiction of the court. With respect to criminal cases, the legislation preserves the sixth amendment rights of defendants by limiting the jury pool to the district where the crime is committed, unless the defendant consents otherwise.

There is an issue not addressed in the bill, and that is who would pay for the parties, including criminal defendants, to travel to the new location. Presumably, because a public function is at issue, the government should pay such expenses. It would be untenable for the courts and prosecutors to travel at government expense while defendants are left to fend for themselves in times of disaster. I am hoping that this can be corrected. There may be due process and sixth amendment violations if we force defendants to pay their own way to a distant courthouse. I hope to work with my colleagues in the House and Senate and the chairman of our committee in the House in the coming weeks to ensure that this oversight is properly resolved.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I strongly believe that we in the Congress must do more, much more, to alleviate the effects of Hurricane Katrina. Thousands of people may be forced to seek bankruptcy protection, but now will be subjected to the onerous and creditor friendly provisions of the newly enacted bankruptcy law, including its means test, which goes into effect on October 17. Victims of disasters and other tragedies, I think, ought be exempt from such rigid requirements.

We have also heard countless reports of price gouging at gas stations. Big oil says the pipelines and refineries are down, thus limiting supply and increasing prices, but somehow they still continue to reap record profits. Along with a number of my colleagues, I have called upon the Federal Trade Commission to investigate this profiteering.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3650, the Federal Judiciary Emergency Special Sessions Act of 2005, deserves the support of every Member in this body.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 1634 and H.R. 3650, en bloc.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the bills be read the third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the bills be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, for the information of colleagues, the bills, as stated, S. 1634 and H.R. 3650, are to address the issue of responding to the emergency of the national disaster which has occurred and in some ways is ongoing in the Gulf States. This allows our Federal court system to continue its operation. This legislation requires it to do so. This likely will be among a series of bills we will address over the coming days and weeks that respond to the disaster itself and to service the victims of that disaster, the people who are still in that coastal area of Louisiana and Mississippi and Alabama, to the victims who have been displaced, and to help volunteers and those people who are pitching in around the country, both government and private sector, as we come together to respond to this disaster that may well be the largest natural disaster we have seen in the last 100 years.

The pending legislation is the Commerce, Science, and Justice appropriations bill. In this bill, as has been discussed, are a number of provisions related to Katrina and our response to Katrina, things such as the small business disaster loans.

We will be, in fact, on that bill shortly, and the chairman will be here. I encourage Members to come over and talk to the chairman and ranking member. We want to move expeditiously with this appropriations bill, in part, because it does have Katrina-related issues in it. I would love to be able to finish this bill this week, if at all possible.

Second, just for the information of our colleagues, the House will pass, at some point today or this afternoon, our second supplemental request to respond to this disaster. We have passed a $10.5 billion bill in an urgent emergency session last Thursday night. The Senate addressed it. This will be a second supplemental. As most know, it is more than $50 billion, a very large sum, but that is the appropriate sum, as a second phase, as determined by our appropriate personnel and staff.

The House will pass that later today. Once they pass that, it will come to the Senate either this afternoon or this evening. I want to make sure our members know we will have rollcall votes today. It may well be tonight, but we need to pass the supplemental as soon as we possibly can.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3650, as we are all aware, much if not all of the Gulf Coast region has been flooded by the devastating forces of Hurricane Katrina. I personally spent 4 days in shelters in and around the Houston area, so I have first hand knowledge of the devastation this natural disaster has caused as well as what the evacuees are going through. In addition to the many problems that have resulted from the aftermath of this hurricane, many of the Federal courthouses in the region are flooded; thus, preventing countless civil and criminal cases from proceeding. Furthermore, many attorneys and court employees have been displaced, not only from their homes, but also from their jobs. H.R. 3650 would permit the circuit courts, district courts, magistrates, and bankruptcy courts to conduct proceedings outside their normal territorial jurisdictions in times of emergency.

The bill further provides that jurors for civil cases may come from either the original or temporary jurisdiction of the court. With respect to criminal cases, the legislation preserves the Sixth Amendment rights of defendants by limiting the jury pool to the district where the crime is committed unless the defendant consents otherwise. While these are issues are important, the bill fails to address who would pay for the parties to the case to travel to the new location. Presumably because a public function is at issue, the government should pay such expenses. It would be untenable for the courts and prosecutors to travel at government expense while defendants are left to fend for themselves in times of disaster. There may be due process and Sixth Amendment violations if we force defendants to pay their own way to distant courthouses.

In spite of my support for this bill, I hope the concerns I just mentioned can be worked out in the coming weeks as this bill moves forward. In closing, I strongly believe we must do much more to alleviate the effects of Hurricane Katrina. Thousands of people may be forced to seek bankruptcy protection but now will be subject to the onerous and creditor-friendly provisions of the newly-enacted bankruptcy law, including its means test. Victims of disasters and other tragedies should be exempt from such rigid requirements.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.