Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
The House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday approved a bill that would give federal judges their first pay raise in two decades, pushing them to the fore of federal earners. The bill, passed by a 28-5 vote, would also increase the workload for senior judges, raise the retirement age for full pension and discourage retired judges from taking work in the private sector. The vote margin suggests the bill’s prospects are good, but the full House is unlikely take up the legislation before the end of the year. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to review a similar bill on Thursday. Under the Federal Judicial Salary Restoration Act of 2007, federal district judges would earn $218,000 annually, uncoupling them from members of Congress, who make $165,200 a year. Federal appeals judges would earn $231,000; Supreme Court associate justices $267,900; and the chief justice $279,900. Federal judicial pay has remained virtually the same since the 1980s, while private attorneys have seen their salaries swell. The bill’s supporters were keen to point out that federal district judges, at $165,200 a year, are often paid less than first-year associates at prestigious firms. As a result, federal judgeships have lost a measure of their allure, and judges are leaving for higher-paying jobs, Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), a co-sponsor of the bill, said at the committee hearing. “The federal judiciary should not be a steppingstone to a high-paying career. It’s the capstone of a great career.” To that effect, the bill would tax retired judges who are collecting a federal pension while earning large salaries in private jobs. “We thought that might be taking advantage of a situation for much greener pastures,” said Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), the committee’s ranking member. For every $2 they made over their salary as a federal judge, $1 would be cut from their pension. The bill would also increase senior judges’ workload from three months a year to four months a year and require 17 years of service before a judge could retire with a full pension. The bill’s detractors warned that the pay increases would give the perception that the judiciary is somehow above the other two branches of the federal government. “The reason it doesn’t pass the smell test is if you serve in one coequal branch of the government, you will be paid significantly more than those serving in the other coequal branches,” said Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), who voted against the bill. “Is the position of federal judge one of greater responsibility than a member of the president’s Cabinet…or a member of Congress?” Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) warned fellow Republicans of the political pitfalls of that argument. “It’s easier to get liberals who are not making anything” to fill the judgeships than capable conservatives who sniff at the pay, he said. “That’s not as tongue-in-cheek as you might think.”
Joe Palazzolo can be contacted at [email protected].

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.