![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.246527777777778in"
height="1.0166666666666666in"}

# Legislative Bulletin..................................................November 8, 2005

**Contents:**

> **H.R. 4241 -- Deficit Reduction Act -- Title V**

**Title V --Committee on the Judiciary**

**[Background]{.underline}:** Under the budget resolution (H. Con. Res.
95), the House authorizing committees were instructed to find savings to
reduce the growth in mandatory spending. The House Judiciary Committee
was originally tasked with finding \$300 million in savings as part of a
\$35 billion package of savings over five years. Once the Republican
Conference adopted the more ambitious goal of \$50 billion in savings
over five years, the Committee was expected to find additional savings.

**[Note]{.underline}**: The subtitle regarding the reorganization of the
9^th^ Circuit Court is similar to an amendment offered by Rep. Mike
Simpson, adopted in the 108^th^ Congress as a House amendment to S. 878.
The amendment was agreed to by a vote of 205-194 (see:
<http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll492.xml>) on October 5, 2004.

**[Savings to Taxpayers]{.underline}:** According to CBO, Title V would
increase federal receipts (a credit against spending and therefore a
form of savings) by \$428 million. Such savings amount to .8% of the
\$53.9 billion deficit reduction package.

**Table 1. Savings By Subtitle, Outlays In Millions**

  ----------------------------------------------- ------------- -------------
  **Committee on Judiciary**                      **2006**      **2006-10**

  L-1 Nonimmigrant Visa Fees                      -80           -500

  Additional Judgeships                           4             72

  *(Future Administrative Costs to New                          *(400)*
  Judgeships)^1^*                                               

  **Total Savings**                               **-76**       **-428**
  ----------------------------------------------- ------------- -------------

^1^ CBO estimates the cost of the new judgeships will exceed \$400
million over the 2006-2010 period, subject to discretionary
appropriations. This cost is authorized at such sums as may be necessary
in the bill but are not calculated in the Committee's reconciliation
package figures, which only calculate mandatory spending. Assuming
appropriations of funds for the new judgeships, the committee savings is
more likely approximately \$28 million, instead of \$428 million.

**[Committee Action]{.underline}**: In late October 2005, the House
Judiciary Committee reported its submissions to the House Budget
Committee to be compiled into one reconciliation package along with the
submissions of the other authorizing committees. On November 3^rd^, the
Budget Committee reported the package, the Deficit Reduction Act, for
consideration by the full House of Representatives.

**[Summary by Subtitle:]{.underline}**

***[Subtitle A: Visa Fees:]{.underline}***

-   Requires the Secretary of State to impose a \$1,500 fee on an
    employer, if the employer is sponsoring an alien who has worked for
    the company, its subsidiary, or affiliate outside the U.S. for one
    continuous year within the last three years and is petitioning for a
    U.S. visa as a nonimmigrant who will work for that company or a
    subsidiary or affiliate. This type of visa is known as an L-1
    non-immigrant visa and was previously created under the Immigration
    and Naturalization Act. The current L-1 visa fee is \$690 (\$500
    anti-fraud fee plus \$190 visa filing fee), and the \$1,500 fee will
    be in addition to, not in place of, the current fees.

-   Imposed the \$1,000 fee on the company if the company is seeking for
    the first time to have the nonimmigrant worker's L-1 visa extended.
    This fee is only for the principal alien and not for the spouse or
    children who are accompanying or following the alien.

-   Specifies that the employer may not require the alien who is the
    beneficiary of this visa to reimburse or otherwise compensate the
    employer for all or a part of the cost of the fee. CBO estimates
    that this new fee structure will apply to 70,000 people annually.

Note: The L-1 non-immigrant is defined as follows in current law (8
U.S.C. 1184(c)):

> "(L) subject to section
> [1184](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001184----000-.html)
> [(c)(2)](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001184----000-.html#c_2)
> of this title, an alien who, within 3 years preceding the time of his
> application for admission into the United States, has been employed
> continuously for one year by a firm or corporation or other legal
> entity or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof and who seeks to enter
> the United States temporarily in order to continue to render his
> services to the same employer or a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in
> a capacity that is managerial, executive, or involves specialized
> knowledge, and the alien spouse and minor children of any such alien
> if accompanying him or following to join him."

***[Subtitle B: Circuit and District Judgeships]{.underline}***

-   Authorizes 68 new judgeships, 12 at the circuit level and 56 in the
    district courts. In addition, the bill would create 25 new permanent
    or temporary bankruptcy judgeships. Specifically, the President is
    authorized to appoint, with the advice and consent of the Senate the
    following circuit court judges:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   1 additional circuit judge for the First Circuit Court of Appeals

-   2 additional circuit judges for the Second District Court of Appeals

-   1 additional circuit judge for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals
    and

-   5 additional circuit judges for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals,
    who shall be in California

-   for temporary judgeships: 1 additional circuit judge for the Eight
    Circuit Court of Appeals and 2 additional circuit judges for the
    Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, who shall be in California. Ten
    years after these judges are confirmed, a vacancy on the eight
    circuit and 2 vacancies on the Ninth Circuit shall not be filled
    (essentially adding these additional judges for a 10-year time
    period).

Note: The 56 new judgeships created in the bill for the district courts
in 22 states are outlined on pages 495-497 of the Budget
Committee-reported bill. Of these, 44 are permanent additions, and 12
are temporary 10-year additions.

-   Extends the temporary judgeships for an extra 5 years for the
    northern district of Ohio and makes permanent the judgeships in the
    districts of Hawaii and Kansas and the eastern district of Missouri.

-   Establishes an Article III Court in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where
    there is one judicial district, compromising two divisions.
    Currently the Virgin Islands' District Court is considered a
    territorial court and according to various legal briefs there have
    been multiple disputes because the court was not an Article III
    Court established by Congress as a federal court.

***[Subtitle C: Bankruptcy Judgeships]{.underline}***

-   The subtitle creates 25 new bankruptcy judgeships, 17 permanent
    judgeships and eight 5-year temporary judgeships. The temporary
    judgeships are established in Delaware, Illinois, Puerto Rico,
    Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,
    Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Tennessee (for further details see
    pages 514-517 of the Budget Committee-reported bill). There is also
    a sense of Congress that bankruptcy judges in the eastern district
    of California should conduct bankruptcy proceedings on a daily
    basis.

***[Subtitle D: 9^th^ Circuit Reorganization]{.underline}***

-   No later than December 31, 2006, splits Alaska, Arizona, Idaho,
    Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington into a new 12th Circuit and
    redefines the 9^th^ Circuit Court as California, Hawaii, Guam, and
    the Northern Mariana Islands.

-   The 12^th^ Circuit will have 14 circuit judges and the 9^th^ will
    have 19 (down from its current 28 judges). Judges will become a part
    of either court depending on their state on the date of enactment,
    though senior judges may elect to be assigned to either. The bill
    details certain provisions to deal with ongoing cases when the
    current 9^th^ Circuit divides into two circuits.

**[Additional Information:]{.underline}** According to Judiciary
Committee Chairman Sensenbrenner, the bill seeks to "address the
administrative inefficiencies caused by the Ninth Circuit's mammoth
size. ... The Ninth has become so big -- in geographic size, in
workload, in number of active and senior judges -- that it can no longer
appropriately discharge its civic functions on behalf of the American
people." According to the Committee:

-   The Ninth has 47 judges, almost twice the number of total judges of
    the next largest circuit.

-   The Ninth represents 56 million people, or roughly one-fifth of our
    nation's population. This is 25-million more people than the second
    largest circuit.

-   The Ninth encompasses nearly 40% of the geographic area of the
    United States. H.R. 4093 creates a new Ninth that will feature
    California, Guam, Hawaii, and the Northern Mariana Islands. The new
    Twelfth will consist of the States of Alaska, Arizona, Idaho,
    Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.

> Source:
> <http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/9thsplitintro102005.pdf>

**[Does this Subtitle Contain Any New State-Government,
Local-Government, or Private-Sector Mandates?]{.underline}**: The bill
makes modifications to the court system in the Virgin Islands and
creates certain procedures for ongoing cases while the 9^th^ Circuit is
divided into two. According to CBO, the legislation would impose a new
private-sector mandate, by requiring employers to pay when a petition is
made for an L-1 visa allowing their foreign employees to transfer to
work for companies in the United States.

[]{.mark}

**[RSC Staff Contact:]{.underline}** Sheila Cole,
sheila.cole@mail.house.gov, (202) 226-9719