Annual Report on the Judiciary: Costs are Down, and Pay Needs to Go Up

In his year-end report on the state of the federal judiciary released at 6 p.m. today, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. praised the courts as frugal, dedicated and crucial to the life and economic recovery of the nation. But to keep the courts strong, Roberts said -- as he has urged in the past -- that Congress needs to pass pay raises, or at least cost-of-living increases, for federal judges as soon as possible.

"Given the judiciary's small cost, and its absolutely critical role in protecting the Constitution and rights we enjoy, I must renew the judiciary's modest petition: Simply provide cost-of-living increases that have been unfairly denied!" Roberts (pictured below) wrote in his report. "We have done our part -- it is long past time for Congress to do its."

As his use of an exclamation point suggests, the tone of Roberts' written report betrays his frustration that his calls -- and those of his predecessor William Rehnquist -- for judicial pay increases have fallen on deaf ears in Congress. "I suspect many are tired of hearing it, and I know I am tired of saying it, but I must make this plea again -- Congress must provide judicial compensation that keeps pace with inflation," Roberts wrote. 

In 2007, Roberts noted, the judiciary committees of both the House and the Senate endorsed substantial pay increases, but the bills languished as the financial state of the nation worsened. "To make a bad situation worse," Roberts added, Congress failed to enact even a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in recent months -- making judges the only federal employees to begin 2009 without a COLA. 

"Congress' inaction this year vividly illustrates why judges' salaries have declined in real terms over the last 20 years," wrote Roberts. "The judiciary is resilient and can weather the occasional neglect that is often the fate of those who quietly do their work. But the judiciary's needs cannot be postponed indefinitely without damaging its fabric." District court judges are currently paid $169,300 -- the same as members of Congress -- while circuit judges are paid $179,500, associate Supreme Court justices $208,100, and the chief justice $217,400.

While Roberts' tone was stern, the arguments he offered to justify an increase were framed more broadly than in some past appeals. Instead of stressing how low judges' pay is compared to the private bar, or how many judges are leaving the bench as a result, Roberts emphasized that the judiciary is a bargain for taxpayers whose benefits to society far outweigh its costs.

Noting that the budget of the judicial branch in 2008 totaled $6.2 billion, Roberts observed, "That represents a mere two-tenths of 1% of the United States' total budget. Two-tenths of 1%! That is all we ask for one of the three branches of government -- the one charged 'to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals.'" (The quotation is from the Federalist Papers.)

Interestingly, Roberts also linked the continued vitality of the federal judiciary to the success of the economic recovery that preoccupies policymakers. "During these times, when the nation faces pressing economic problems, resulting in business failures, home foreclosures, and bankruptcy, and when Congress is called upon to enact novel legislation to address those challenges, the courts are a source of strength," Roberts stated. "They guarantee that those who seek justice have access to a fair forum where all enter as equals and disputes are resolved impartially under the rule of law."

As small as the judiciary's budget is, Roberts devoted several pages of his report to the cost-cutting measures the courts have undertaken to limit rent, personnel and information technology costs. Taken together, these measures should save up to $300 million through 2017, Roberts reported. 

The Supreme Court itself has "worked hard to contain costs," Roberts added. The current $122 million renovation of the Court building has encountered several delays -- it won't be done until 2010, Roberts said -- but "remains on budget despite those setbacks -- a welcome departure from the Washington norm." That may have been an oblique reference to the Capitol Visitor Center, which opened recently just across the street from the high court -- a congressional project that mushroomed from an original budget of $265 million to a final cost of $621 million.

Roberts' report began with praise for a different entity altogether -- the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of American History, which re-opened in November after its own renovation. He featured the new gallery housing the fragile and tattered American flag that inspired Francis Scott Key to write the national anthem. The institution "painstakingly preserved this fragile flag," Roberts wrote. The flag "inspires deep reverence," Roberts said, because "it speaks eloquently to the sacrifices of every American who has contributed to the preservation of the United States." One of the duties of the chief justice is to serve as chancellor of the Smithsonian.

Comments

[Christopher M. Pohl]

I am not generally sympathetic to pleas for raises for the Judiciary, but the Chief Justice (and his predecessor) has made and continues to make a compelling case on these issues. Even though many Justices come to the bench having previously acquired considerable wealth that is not universally the case and nor should it be a factor for reasonable and equitable compensation.

Congress' failure to act on this issue in a meaningful way, is a continued witness to their collective failure on so many important issues. Even a doubling or tripling of the overall Judiciary budget (including substantial raises) would be a comparatively trivial investment in the best interests of the nation and its people.