```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 121 (Tuesday, September 11, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H5791-H5793]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                  LOCAL COURTHOUSE SAFETY ACT OF 2012

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 6185) to improve security at State and local 
courthouses, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6185

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Local Courthouse Safety Act 
     of 2012''.

     SEC. 2. SECURITY TRAINING.

       Part D of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe 
     Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3741 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 403. PREVENTING VIOLENCE AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT AND 
                   ENSURING OFFICER RESILIENCE AND SURVIVABILITY.

       ``The Director may carry out a training and technical 
     assistance program designed to teach employees of State, 
     local, and tribal law enforcement agencies how to anticipate, 
     survive, and respond to violent encounters during the course 
     of their duties, including duties relating to security at 
     State, county, and tribal courthouses. If the Director offers 
     a training program specifically designed to train 
     participants on courthouse security issues, preference for 
     admission into such program shall be given to employees of 
     jurisdictions that have magnetometers available for use at 
     their courthouses.''.

     SEC. 3. STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE.

       The State Justice Institute Act of 1984 is amended--
       (1) in section 203(b)(1) (42 U.S.C. 10702(b)(1)), in the 
     matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting ``, safe,'' 
     after ``a fair''; and
       (2) in section 206 (42 U.S.C. 10705)--
       (A) in subsection (c)--
       (i) in paragraph (14)--

       (I) by inserting ``to'' before ``conduct''; and
       (II) by striking ``and'' at the end;

       (ii) by redesignating paragraph (15) as paragraph (16); and
       (iii) by inserting after paragraph (14) the following:
       ``(15) to improve the safety and security of State and 
     local courts; and''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Magnetometers.--In the case of a grant awarded under 
     this section to be used as described in subsection (c)(15), 
     if the State or local court applying for the grant does not 
     have magnetometers available for use, not less than $300 nor 
     more than $1,000 of the matching fund required under 
     subsection (d) of the State or local court shall be used to 
     acquire a magnetometer.''.

     SEC. 4. SECURITY EQUIPMENT.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter III of chapter 5 of title 40, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding after section 559 
     the following:

     ``Sec. 560. Surplus security equipment for State and local 
       courts

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
       ``(1) the term `surplus security equipment' means surplus 
     property that is used to detect weapons, including metal 
     detectors, wands, and baggage screening devices; and
       ``(2) the term `qualifying State or local courthouse' means 
     a courthouse of a State or local government that has less 
     security equipment than the security needs of the courthouse 
     require.
       ``(b) Disposal of Surplus Security Equipment.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this subchapter, the Administrator of General Services shall 
     ensure that a qualifying State or local courthouse has an 
     opportunity to request to receive surplus security equipment 
     for use at the qualifying State or local courthouse before 
     the surplus security equipment is made available to any other 
     individual or entity under this subchapter.
       ``(2) Disposal.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), upon 
     request by a qualifying State or local courthouse for surplus 
     security equipment for use at the qualifying State or local 
     courthouse, the surplus security equipment shall be made 
     available to the qualifying State or local courthouse without 
     cost, except for any costs of shipping, handling, and 
     maintenance.
       ``(B) Multiple requests.--If more than 1 qualifying State 
     or local courthouse requests a particular piece of surplus 
     security equipment, the surplus security equipment shall be 
     distributed based on need, as determined by the Administrator 
     of General Services, with priority given to a qualifying 
     State or local courthouse that has no security equipment.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of 
     sections for chapter 5 of title 40, United States Code, is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 559 
     the following:

[[Page H5792]]

``560. Surplus security equipment for State and local courts.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.

                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. 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 materials on H.R. 6185, as 
amended, currently under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank our Judiciary 
Committee colleague, Mrs. Adams of Florida, for her work on this issue 
to make America's courthouses safer. This bipartisan, bicameral bill 
passed the Senate Judiciary Committee by unanimous consent last May.

                              {time}  1510

  Before I yield to her, I do want to urge my colleagues to support 
this bill and thank Mrs. Adams again for all of her work that brought 
us to this point we are here today.
  Mr. Speaker, I'd like to thank my Judiciary Committee colleague, Mrs. 
Adams of Florida, for her work on this issue to make America's 
courthouses safer. This bipartisan, bicameral bill passed the Senate 
Judiciary Committee by unanimous consent last May.
  State and local courthouses are the workplace for many people. 
Judges, secretaries, custodians, clerks and attorneys are there every 
workday. Police officers, litigants and the public go to these 
courthouses for many reasons. Many of us are called upon to report 
there for jury duty.
  Often in these courthouses, the stakes, and emotions, are high when 
defendants confront their accusers and victims confront there 
perpetrators.
  Threats against judges and acts of violence in courthouses and 
courtrooms are occurring throughout the country with greater frequency 
than ever before. The number of threats and violent incidents that 
target the judiciary has increased dramatically in recent years.
  At the federal level, the U.S. Marshals Service's Center for Judicial 
Security reports the number of judicial threat investigations has more 
than doubled to over 1,200 in the past nine years. At the state and 
local levels, data collected by the Center for Judicial and Executive 
Security shows that the number of violent incidents in state 
courthouses has gone up every decade since 1970.
  Since 2010, there has been about one shooting per month at local 
courthouses across the country. In September 2011, for example a 
defendant opened fire in the Crawford County Courthouse in Arkansas, 
killing a judge's secretary.
  In December 2011, a defendant retrieved a gun from his car, walked 
into the Cook County Courthouse in Minnesota and shot the prosecuting 
attorney, a witness and the bailiff.
  So far in 2012, there have been at least five courthouse shootings, 
including a fatal attack in my home State of Texas.
  Security at many local courthouses is lax, particularly in rural and 
suburban areas where access to equipment, training and resources is 
especially scarce. Law enforcement officers, court personnel and 
members of our communities are in harm's way as a result.
  One Minnesota judge put it well in a recent correspondence to his 
colleagues: ``I'm no longer willing to risk my life, the life of court 
staff, [and] the life of the public who have no choice about going to 
court.''
  This bill accomplishes three objectives. First, the bill gives State 
and local courthouses direct access to security equipment that the 
Federal Government no longer uses.
  This provision is modeled after a Defense Department program that 
allows the Pentagon to give its excess equipment to local police and 
firefighters. This legislation gives State and local authorities access 
to excess metal detectors, wands and baggage screening machines.
  Second, this bill gives States the flexibility they need to make 
courthouse security improvements, but requires modest matching funds.
  The bill does not require any new spending and it does not impose any 
new mandates. States can use existing federal resources for courthouse 
security upgrades if they so choose.
  Lastly, through existing programs and funding authorizations, 
training and technical assistance will be provided to local law 
enforcement officers to teach them how to anticipate and survive 
violent encounters.
  The identical Senate bill has broad bipartisan support and its ten 
co-sponsors come from both sides of the aisle.
  This bill has been endorsed by six organizations, including: the 
National Sheriffs Association, the National Association for Court 
Management, the Conference of Chief Justices, the Conference of State 
Court Administrators, the American Judges Association and the National 
Court Reporters Association.
  The Congressional Budget Office scored this bill at zero cost.
  This bill is a cost-effective approach to provide safety training and 
technical assistance to local law enforcement agencies. It improves 
security at State and local government courthouses, which are most in 
need of basic safety equipment and training.
  Our State and local law enforcement officers need support to ensure 
the security of our courthouses. This bill does that as it recycles 
excess Federal security equipment and protects Americans at the same 
time.
  I again thank Mrs. Adams for her work on this issue and I urge my 
colleagues to support this bipartisan, bicameral bill.

         House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and 
           Government Reform,
                               Washington, DC, September 10, 2012.
     Hon. Lamar Smith,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Mr. Chairman: On August 1, 2012, the Committee on the 
     Judiciary ordered H.R. 6185, the ``Local Courthouse Safety 
     Act of 2012,'' reported to the House. Thank you for 
     consulting with the Committee on Oversight and Government 
     Reform with regard to H.R. 6185 on those matters within the 
     Committee's jurisdiction. I am writing to confirm our mutual 
     understanding with respect to the consideration of H.R. 6185.
       In the interest of expediting the House's consideration of 
     H.R. 6185, I will forego consideration of the bill. However, 
     I do so only with the understanding that this procedural 
     route will not be construed to prejudice the Committee on 
     Oversight and Government Reform's jurisdictional interest and 
     prerogatives on this bill or any other similar legislation 
     and will not be considered as precedent for consideration of 
     matters of jurisdictional interest to my Committee in the 
     future.
       I respectfully request your support for the appointment of 
     outside conferees from the Committee on Oversight and 
     Government Reform should this bill or a similar bill be 
     considered in a conference with the Senate. I also request 
     that you include our exchange of letters on this matter in 
     the Committee Report on H.R. 6185 and in the Congressional 
     Record during consideration of this bill on the House floor. 
     Thank you for your attention to these matters.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Darrell Issa,
     Chairman.
                                  ____

                                         House of Representatives,

                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                               Washington, DC, September 10, 2012.
     Hon. Darrell Issa,
     Rayburn House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Issa: Thank you for your letter of even date 
     herewith regarding H.R. 6185, the ``Local Courthouse Safety 
     Act of 2012,'' which the Judiciary Committee reported 
     favorably to the House, as amended, today.
       I am most appreciative of your decision to forego 
     consideration of H.R. 6185, as amended, so that it may move 
     expeditiously to the House floor. I acknowledge that although 
     you are waiving formal consideration of the bill, the 
     Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is in no way 
     waiving its jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in 
     the bill. In addition, if a conference is necessary on this 
     legislation, I will support any request that your committee 
     be represented therein.
       Finally, I shall be pleased to include your letter and this 
     letter in the Congressional Record during floor consideration 
     of H.R. 6185.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Lamar Smith,
                                                         Chairman.

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Adams).
  Mrs. ADAMS. I rise today in support of H.R. 6185, the Local 
Courthouse Safety Act of 2012, because it will give local courthouses 
the resources to enhance their security, and to do so at no cost to the 
Federal taxpayer. My bill would allow for surplus metal detectors to be 
provided to local courthouses to enhance security.
  Like other regions throughout our Nation, central Florida has seen 
its share of courthouse attacks. Shortly before I joined the Orange 
County Sheriff's Office as a deputy sheriff, a courthouse shooting 
occurred. An armed gunman by the name of Thomas Provenzano walked into 
the Orange County Courthouse with a 12-gauge shotgun, an assault rifle, 
and a .38 revolver, all loaded with live ammunition. Bailiff William 
Wilkerson, a 60-

[[Page H5793]]

year-old veteran who retired from the Navy as a lieutenant commander, 
was killed on that day. Bailiff Harry Dalton, a 53-year-old father of 
six, was shot in the face and left paralyzed from the shooting. He died 
7 years later. Correctional Officer Mark Parker was only 19 years old 
at the time of the shooting. He survived the shooting but was paralyzed 
from the shoulders down and had to spend the rest of his life confined 
to a wheelchair.
  I introduced the Local Courthouse Safety Act because the things this 
bill does are important to me and to most Americans. I know the 
families of Bailiff Dalton and Bailiff Wilkerson, who lost their lives 
as a result of the violence that day in the Orange County Courthouse, 
and remained friends with Officer Parker until he passed away a few 
years ago. I am deeply aware of the grief they've had to live with all 
of these years.
  Since September of 2010, there has been about one shooting per month 
at a local courthouse. So even though the shooting in Orange County 
happened 30 years ago, courthouse shootings are still happening all 
over this country and innocent people are still dying.
  Those who are exercising their constitutional right of seeking 
justice in our courtrooms should not have to fear for their safety, and 
neither should our law enforcement officers, judges, advocates, and 
court personnel. It is my hope that this bill will help to prevent 
horrific and senseless incidents of violence like this from happening 
in our local courthouses.
  I want to thank my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee for 
recognizing that we need to take courthouse security seriously and for 
joining me in this bipartisan effort to help prevent violence in local 
courthouses across this country. We need to give sheriffs and local 
courthouses access to the training, equipment, and resources they need 
to improve security, so I urge support for the bill.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6185, the Local Courthouse 
Safety Act. This measure will provide critical assistance to State and 
local governments to provide courthouse security.
  To begin with, many State and local courthouses face serious security 
challenges. Serious violence often occurs in these facilities, but many 
courthouses across the Nation still lack basic security protections 
such as metal detectors. H.R. 6185 responds to this critical problem by 
giving sheriffs, as well as State and local courthouses, access to 
training, equipment, and other resources to help them improve security.
  H.R. 6185 accomplishes these goals by making use of existing 
resources. This legislation requires the General Services 
Administration to make available to State and local courts--at no cost, 
except for shipping, handling, and maintenance--surplus security 
equipment that is used to detect weapons, such as metal detectors, 
wands, and baggage screening devices. To qualify to receive such 
security equipment, a State or local courthouse must have less security 
equipment than necessary to meet the security needs of that courthouse. 
Because these devices are surplus and not otherwise being utilized by 
any Federal agencies, it is a wise use of taxpayer money to allow this 
equipment to be put into service at the State and local level.
  Another important aspect of the bill is that it expands the scope of 
the grants awarded by the State Justice Institute to include the 
improvement of the safety and security of State and local courts. As a 
result, H.R. 6185 strengthens the Institute's current authority to 
award grants to support education, training, and technical assistance 
projects to improve the administration of justice in the State courts. 
This measure addresses, in a meaningful way, the serious security 
challenges that State and local courthouses face.
  Not surprisingly, H.R. 6185 enjoys a broad range of support, 
including the National Sheriffs' Association, the National Association 
for Court Management, the Conference of Chief Justices, the Conference 
of State Court Administrators, American Judges Association, the 
National Court Reporters Association, and the Center for Judicial and 
Executive Security.
  I commend my colleague, the gentlelady from Florida (Mrs. Adams) for 
her work in developing the bill, and I urge my colleagues to support 
the legislation.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for 
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 6185, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________
```