HR-3426-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsored by Jefferson Shreve (R-IN)
What it does
This bill would require the General Services Administration (GSA) to implement courtroom-sharing among magistrate, bankruptcy, and senior district judges in federal courthouses, based on set ratios (such as one courtroom per two magistrate judges in courthouses with three or more magistrate judges). It would prohibit GSA from building new courthouses that do not meet these sharing requirements, and would require that if a new courthouse adds capacity, existing space in the same complex must be fully used or given up. GSA would have to update the U.S. Courts Design Guide within 180 days of enactment to reflect these rules.
Who benefits
Taxpayers, who may see reduced federal construction spending; GSA, which gains clearer statutory direction for space planning; and members of Congress or watchdog groups concerned about federal real estate costs, since GSA and Government Accountability Office reports have flagged underused courtroom space.
Who is hurt
Federal judges, particularly senior, magistrate, and bankruptcy judges, who may have less dedicated courtroom access and need to schedule around shared use; court staff and litigants in high-caseload districts who could face scheduling delays; and local communities or contractors in areas that had anticipated new courthouse construction projects that may now be limited or altered.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that GSA and GAO reports have repeatedly found federal courtrooms sitting empty much of the time, especially those used by senior and part-time judges, making new construction wasteful when existing space could be shared. They contend codifying courtroom-sharing ratios into law, rather than leaving it as informal GSA policy, would create durable, enforceable accountability for federal construction spending and prevent costly duplicative building projects.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that rigid, one-size-fits-all courtroom ratios ignore local caseload realities and could create scheduling bottlenecks that slow down civil and criminal case processing in busy districts. They contend that judicial independence includes adequate physical resources to manage dockets efficiently, and that mandating space limits by statute removes flexibility that judges and GSA currently use to address district-specific needs.
Constitutional context
Congress's authority to set requirements for federal building construction and management derives from the Necessary and Proper Clause combined with its Article I power over federal property and spending; this bill does not implicate judicial independence protections under Article III since it governs physical space allocation, not judicial decision-making or tenure.
Checks and balances
Congress directs an executive agency (GSA) on how to allocate federal courthouse space, constraining GSA's discretion in courthouse construction and indirectly affecting judiciary operating conditions, though it does not alter judicial authority itself.
Historical precedent
GSA has operated courtroom-sharing policies administratively for years based on Judicial Conference and GAO recommendations; this bill would be among the first efforts to codify such sharing ratios into statute.