IIB
107TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 2657
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
SEPTEMBER 21, 2001
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs
AN ACT
To amend title 11, District of Columbia Code, to redesignate
the Family Division of the Superior Court of the District
of Columbia as the Family Court of the Superior Court,
to recruit and retain trained and experienced judges to
serve in the Family Court, to promote consistency and
efficiency in the assignment of judges to the Family
Court and in the consideration of actions and pro-
ceedings in the Family Court, and for other purposes.
HR 2657 RFS
(4) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sec-
tions for subchapter I of chapter 23 of title 16, Dis-
trict of Columbia, is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 16–2301 the following new
item:
‘‘16–2301.1. References deemed to refer to Family Court of the Superior
Court.’’.
SEC. 3. APPOINTMENT AND ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGES; NUM-
BER AND QUALIFICATIONS.
(a) NUMBER
OF JUDGES
FOR FAMILY COURT;
QUALIFICATIONS AND TERMS OF SERVICE.—Chapter 9 of
title 11, District of Columbia Code, is amended by insert-
ing after section 11–908 the following new section:
‘‘§ 11–908A. Special rules regarding assignment and
service of judges of Family Court.
‘‘(a) NUMBER OF JUDGES.—The number of judges
serving on the Family Court of the Superior Court at any
time may not be—
‘‘(1) less than the number of judges determined
by the chief judge of the Superior Court to be need-
ed to serve on the Family Court under the transition
plan for the Family Court prepared and submitted
to the President and Congress under section 3(b) of
the District of Columbia Family Court Act of 2001;
or
‘‘(2) greater than 15.
HR 2657 RFS
‘‘(b) QUALIFICATIONS.—The chief judge may not as-
sign an individual to serve on the Family Court of the
Superior Court unless—
‘‘(1) the individual has training or expertise in
family law;
‘‘(2) the individual certifies to the chief judge
that the individual intends to serve the full term of
service, except that this paragraph shall not apply
with respect to individuals serving as senior judges
under section 11–1504; and
‘‘(3) the individual certifies to the chief judge
that the individual will participate in the ongoing
training programs carried out for judges of the
Family Court under section 11–1104(c).
‘‘(c) TERM OF SERVICE.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in para-
graph (2), an individual assigned to serve as a judge
of the Family Court of the Superior Court shall
serve for a term of 5 years.
‘‘(2) SPECIAL RULE FOR JUDGES SERVING ON
SUPERIOR COURT ON DATE OF ENACTMENT OF FAM-
ILY COURT ACT.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—An individual assigned
to serve as a judge of the Family Court of the
Superior Court who is serving as a judge of the
HR 2657 RFS
Superior Court on the date of the enactment of
the District of Columbia Family Court Act of
2001 shall serve for a term of not fewer than
3 years.
‘‘(B) REDUCTION OF PERIOD FOR JUDGES
SERVING IN FAMILY DIVISION.—In the case of
a judge of the Superior Court who is serving as
a judge in the Family Division of the Court on
the date of the enactment of the District of Co-
lumbia Family Court Act of 2001, the 3-year
term applicable under subparagraph (A) shall
be reduced by the length of any period of con-
secutive service as a judge in such Division as
of the date of the enactment of such Act.
‘‘(3) ASSIGNMENT FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICE.—
After the term of service of a judge of the Family
Court (as described in paragraph (1) or paragraph
(2)) expires, at the judge’s request the judge may be
assigned for additional service on the Family Court
for a period of such duration (consistent with section
431(c) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act)
as the chief judge may provide.
‘‘(4) PERMITTING SERVICE ON FAMILY COURT
FOR ENTIRE TERM.—At the request of the judge, a
judge may serve as a judge of the Family Court for
HR 2657 RFS
the judge’s entire term of service as a judge of the
Superior Court under section 431(c) of the District
of Columbia Home Rule Act.
‘‘(d) REASSIGNMENT
TO OTHER DIVISIONS.—The
chief judge may reassign a judge of the Family Court to
any division of the Superior Court if the chief judge deter-
mines that the judge is unable to continue serving in the
Family Court.’’.
(b) PLAN FOR FAMILY COURT TRANSITION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the chief
judge of the Superior Court of the District of Co-
lumbia shall prepare and submit to the President
and Congress a transition plan for the Family Court
of the Superior Court, and shall include in the plan
the following:
(A) The chief judge’s determination of the
number of judges needed to serve on the Family
Court.
(B) The chief judge’s determination of the
role and function of the presiding judge of the
Family Court.
(C) The chief judge’s determination of the
number of magistrate judges of the Family
HR 2657 RFS
Court needed for appointment under section
11–1732, District of Columbia Code.
(D) The chief judge’s determination of the
appropriate 
functions 
of 
such 
magistrate
judges, together with the compensation of and
other personnel matters pertaining to such
magistrate judges.
(E) A plan for case flow, case manage-
ment, and staffing needs (including the needs
for both judicial and nonjudicial personnel) for
the Family Court.
(F) A description of how the Superior
Court will meet the requirements of section 11–
1104(a), District of Columbia Code (as added
by section 4(a)), regarding the promulgation of
rules to enforce the ‘‘one family, one judge’’ re-
quirement for cases and proceedings in the
Family Court.
(G) An analysis of the needs of the Family
Court for space, equipment, and other physical
plant requirements, as determined in consulta-
tion with the Administrator of General Services.
(H) An analysis of the success of the use
of magistrate judges under the expedited ap-
pointment procedures established under section
HR 2657 RFS
6(d) in reducing the number of pending actions
and proceedings within the jurisdiction of the
Family Court (as described in section 11–
902(d), District of Columbia, as amended by
subsection (a)).
(I) Consistent with the requirements of
paragraph (2), a proposal and timetable for the
disposition of actions and proceedings pending
in the Family Division of the Superior Court as
of the date of the enactment of this Act (to-
gether with actions and proceedings described
in section 11–1101, District of Columbia Code,
which were initiated in the Family Division but
remain pending in other Divisions of the Supe-
rior Court as of such date) in a manner con-
sistent with applicable Federal and District of
Columbia law and best practices, including (but
not limited to) best practices developed by the
American Bar Association and the National
Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.
(2) DISPOSITION AND TRANSFER OF PENDING
ACTIONS
AND
PROCEEDINGS.—The chief judge of
the Superior Court shall take such actions as may
be necessary to provide for the earliest practicable
disposition of actions and proceedings pending in the
HR 2657 RFS
Family Division of the Superior Court as of the date
of the enactment of this Act (together with actions
and proceedings described in section 11–1101, Dis-
trict of Columbia Code, which were initiated in the
Family Division but remain pending in other Divi-
sions of the Superior Court as of such date), but in
no event may any such action or proceeding remain
pending longer than 18 months after the date the
chief judge submits the transition plan required
under paragraph (1) to the President and Congress.
(3) 
TRANSFER
OF
ACTIONS
AND
PRO-
CEEDINGS.—The chief judge of the Superior Court
shall take such steps as may be required to ensure
that each action or proceeding within the jurisdiction
of the Family Court of the Superior Court (as de-
scribed in section 11–902(d), District of Columbia
Code, as amended by subsection (a)) which is pend-
ing as of the effective date described in section 9 is
transferred or otherwise assigned to the Family
Court immediately upon such date.
(4) EFFECTIVE DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF
PLAN.—The chief judge of the Superior Court may
not take any action to implement the transition plan
under this subsection until the expiration of the 30-
day period which begins on the date the chief judge
HR 2657 RFS
submits the plan to the President and Congress
under paragraph (1).
(c) TRANSITION
TO
APPROPRIATE
NUMBER
OF
JUDGES.—
(1) ANALYSIS BY CHIEF JUDGE OF SUPERIOR
COURT.—The chief judge of the Superior Court of
the District of Columbia shall include in the transi-
tion plan prepared under subsection (b)—
(A) the chief judge’s determination of the
number of individuals serving as judges of the
Superior Court who meet the qualifications for
judges of the Family Court of the Superior
Court under section 11–908A, District of Co-
lumbia Code (as added by subsection (a)); and
(B) if the chief judge determines that the
number of individuals described in subpara-
graph (A) is less than the number of individuals
the chief judge is required to assign to the
Family Court under such section, a request
that the President appoint (in accordance with
section 433 of the District of Columbia Home
Rule Act) such additional number of individuals
to serve on the Superior Court who meet the
qualifications for judges of the Family Court
under such section as may be required to enable
HR 2657 RFS
the chief judge to make the required number of
assignments.
(2) ONE-TIME APPOINTMENT OF ADDITIONAL
JUDGES TO SUPERIOR COURT FOR SERVICE ON FAM-
ILY
COURT.—If the President receives a request
from the chief judge of the Superior Court of the
District of Columbia under paragraph (1)(B), the
President (in accordance with section 433 of the
District of Columbia Home Rule Act) shall appoint
additional judges to the Superior Court who meet
the qualifications for judges of the Family Court in
a number equal to the number of additional appoint-
ments so requested by the chief judge, and each
judge so appointed shall be assigned by the chief
judge to serve on the Family Court of the Superior
Court.
(3) ROLE OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JUDICIAL
NOMINATION COMMISSION.—For purposes of section
434(d)(1) of the District of Columbia Home Rule
Act, the submission of a request from the chief
judge of the Superior Court of the District of Co-
lumbia under paragraph (1)(B) shall be deemed to
create a number of vacancies in the position of judge
of the Superior Court equal to the number of addi-
tional appointments so requested by the chief judge.
HR 2657 RFS
In carrying out this paragraph, the District of Co-
lumbia Judicial Nomination Commission shall re-
cruit individuals for possible nomination and ap-
pointment to the Superior Court who meet the quali-
fications for judges of the Family Court of the Supe-
rior Court.
(4) JUDGES APPOINTED UNDER ONE-TIME AP-
POINTMENT PROCEDURES NOT TO COUNT AGAINST
LIMIT ON NUMBER OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES.—
Any judge who is appointed to the Superior Court
of the District of Columbia pursuant to the one-time
appointment procedures under this subsection for
assignment to the Family Court of the Superior
Court shall be appointed without regard to the limit
on the number of judges of the Superior Court
under section 11–903, District of Columbia Code.
Any judge who is appointed to the Superior Court
under any procedures other than the one-time ap-
pointment procedures under this subsection shall
count against such limit, without regard to whether
or not the judge is appointed to replace a judge ap-
pointed under the one-time appointment procedures
under this subsection or is otherwise assigned to the
Family Court of the Superior Court.
(d) REPORT BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL.—
HR 2657 RFS
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comp-
troller General shall prepare and submit to Congress
and the chief judge of the Superior Court of the Dis-
trict of Columbia a report on the implementation of
this Act (including the effect of the transition plan
under subsection (b) on the implementation of this
Act), and shall include in the report the following:
(A) An analysis of the procedures used to
make the initial appointments of judges of the
Family Court under this Act and the amend-
ments made by this Act, including an analysis
of the time required to make such appointments
and the effect of the qualification requirements
for judges of the Court (including requirements
relating to the length of service on the Court)
on the time required to make such appoint-
ments.
(B) An analysis of the impact of mag-
istrate judges for the Family Court (including
the expedited initial appointment of magistrate
judges for the Court under section 6(d)) on the
workload of judges and other personnel of the
Court.
HR 2657 RFS
(C) An analysis of the number of judges
needed for the Family Court, including an anal-
ysis of how the number may be affected by the
qualification requirements for judges, the avail-
ability of magistrate judges, and other provi-
sions of this Act or the amendments made by
this Act.
(D) An analysis of the timeliness of the
resolution and disposition of pending actions
and proceedings required under the transition
plan (as described in subsection (b)(1)(I) and
(b)(2)), including an analysis of the effect of
the availability of magistrate judges on the time
required to resolve and dispose of such actions
and proceedings.
(2) SUBMISSION TO CHIEF JUDGE OF SUPERIOR
COURT.—Prior to submitting the report under para-
graph (1) to Congress, the Comptroller General shall
provide a preliminary version of the report to the
chief judge of the Superior Court and shall take any
comments and recommendations of the chief judge
into consideration in preparing the final version of
the report.
(e) ONGOING REPORTS
ON PENDING CASES
AND
PROCEEDINGS.—
HR 2657 RFS
(1) IN GENERAL.—The chief judge of the Supe-
rior Court of the District of Columbia shall submit
a status report to the President and Congress on the
disposition of actions and proceedings pending in the
Family Division of the Superior Court as of the date
of the enactment of this Act (together with actions
and proceedings described in section 11–1101, Dis-
trict of Columbia Code, which were initiated in the
Family Division but remain pending in other Divi-
sions of the Superior Court as of such date) and the
extent to which the Court is in compliance with the
requirements of this Act regarding the timetable for
the disposition of such actions and proceedings.
(2) TIMING OF REPORTS.—The chief judge of
the Superior Court shall submit the report required
under paragraph (1) not later than 6 months after
submitting the transition plan under subsection (b)
and every 6 months thereafter until the final disposi-
tion or transfer to the Family Court of all of the ac-
tions and proceedings described in such paragraph.
(f) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The first sentence
of section 11–908(a), District of Columbia Code, is
amended by striking ‘‘The chief judge’’ and inserting
‘‘Subject to section 11–908A, the chief judge’’.
HR 2657 RFS
(g) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections
for chapter 9 of title 11, District of Columbia Code, is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section
11–908 the following new item:
‘‘11–908A. Special rules regarding assignment and service of judges of Family
Court.’’.
SEC. 4. IMPROVING ADMINISTRATION OF CASES AND PRO-
CEEDINGS IN FAMILY COURT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 11 of title 11, District
of Columbia, is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing new sections:
‘‘§ 11–1102. Use of alternative dispute resolution.
‘‘To the greatest extent practicable and safe, cases
and proceedings in the Family Court of the Superior
Court shall be resolved through alternative dispute resolu-
tion procedures, in accordance with such rules as the Su-
perior Court may promulgate.
‘‘§ 11–1103. Standards of practice for appointed coun-
sel.
‘‘The Superior Court shall establish standards of
practice for attorneys appointed as counsel in the Family
Court of the Superior Court.
‘‘§ 11–1104. Administration.
‘‘(a) ‘ONE FAMILY, ONE JUDGE’ REQUIREMENT FOR
CASES AND PROCEEDINGS.—
HR 2657 RFS
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Superior Court shall
promulgate rules for the Family Court which require
all issues within the jurisdiction of the Family Court
concerning one family or one child to be decided by
one judge, to the greatest extent practicable, fea-
sible, and lawful.
‘‘(2) SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS.—Under the
rules promulgated by the Superior Court under
paragraph (1), to the greatest extent practicable,
feasible, and lawful—
‘‘(A) if an individual who is a party to an
action or proceeding assigned to the Family
Court has an immediate family or household
member who is a party to another action or
proceeding assigned to the Family Court, the
individual’s action or proceeding shall be as-
signed to the same judge or magistrate judge to
whom the immediate family member’s action or
proceeding is assigned; and
‘‘(B) if an individual who is a party to an
action or proceeding assigned to the Family
Court becomes a party to another action or pro-
ceeding assigned to the Family Court, the indi-
vidual’s subsequent action or proceeding shall
be assigned to the same judge or magistrate
HR 2657 RFS
judge to whom the individual’s initial action or
proceeding is assigned.
‘‘(b) RETENTION OF JURISDICTION OVER CASES.—
Any action or proceeding assigned to the Family Court
of the Superior Court shall remain under the jurisdiction
of the Family Court until the action or proceeding is fi-
nally disposed. If the judge to whom the action or pro-
ceeding is assigned ceases to serve on the Family Court
prior to the final disposition of the action or proceeding,
the presiding judge of the Family Court shall ensure that
the matter or proceeding is reassigned to a judge serving
on the Family Court, unless there are extraordinary cir-
cumstances, subject to approval and certification by the
presiding judge and based on appropriate documentation
in the record, which demonstrate that a case is nearing
permanency and that changing judges would both delay
that goal and result in a violation of the Adoption and
Safe Families Act of 1997 (or an amendment made by
such Act).
‘‘(c) TRAINING PROGRAM.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The presiding judge of the
Family Court shall carry out an ongoing program to
provide training in family law and related matters
for judges of the Family Court, other judges of the
Superior Court, and appropriate nonjudicial per-
HR 2657 RFS
sonnel, and shall include in the program information
and instruction regarding the following:
‘‘(A) Child development.
‘‘(B) Family dynamics.
‘‘(C) Relevant Federal and District of Co-
lumbia laws.
‘‘(D) Permanency planning principles and
practices.
‘‘(E) Recognizing the risk factors for child
abuse.
‘‘(F) Any other matters the presiding
judge considers appropriate.
‘‘(2) USE OF CROSS-TRAINING.—The program
carried out under this section shall use the resources
of lawyers and legal professionals, social workers,
and experts in the field of child development and
other related fields.
‘‘(d) ACCESSIBILITY OF MATERIALS, SERVICES, AND
PROCEEDINGS; PROMOTION OF ‘FAMILY-FRIENDLY’ EN-
VIRONMENT.—
‘‘(1) IN
GENERAL.—To the greatest extent
practicable, the chief judge of the Superior Court
shall ensure that the materials and services provided
by the Family Court are understandable and acces-
sible to the individuals and families served by the
HR 2657 RFS
Court, and that the Court carries out its duties in
a manner which reflects the special needs of families
with children.
‘‘(2) LOCATION
OF
PROCEEDINGS.—To the
maximum extent feasible, safe, and practicable,
cases and proceedings in the Family Court shall be
conducted at locations readily accessible to the par-
ties involved.
‘‘(e) INTEGRATED COMPUTERIZED CASE TRACKING
AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.—The Executive Officer of
the District of Columbia courts under section 11–1703
shall work with the Joint Committee on Judicial Adminis-
tration in the District of Columbia—
‘‘(1) to ensure that all records and materials of
cases and proceedings in the Family Court are
stored and maintained in electronic format accessible
by computers for the use of judges, magistrate
judges, and nonjudicial personnel of the Family
Court, and for the use of other appropriate offices
of the District government in accordance with the
plan for integrating computer systems prepared by
the Mayor of the District of Columbia under section
4(c) of the District of Columbia Family Court Act
of 2001;
HR 2657 RFS
‘‘(2) to establish and operate an electronic
tracking and management system for cases and pro-
ceedings in the Family Court for the use of judges
and nonjudicial personnel of the Family Court, using
the records and materials stored and maintained
pursuant to paragraph (1); and
‘‘(3) to expand such system to cover all divi-
sions of the Superior Court as soon as practicable.
‘‘§ 11–1105. Social services and other related services.
‘‘(a) ON-SITE COORDINATION OF SERVICES AND IN-
FORMATION.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Mayor of the District
of Columbia, in consultation with the chief judge of
the Superior Court, shall ensure that representatives
of the appropriate offices of the District government
which provide social services and other related serv-
ices to individuals and families served by the Family
Court (including the District of Columbia Public
Schools, the District of Columbia Housing Author-
ity, the Child and Family Services Agency, the Of-
fice of the Corporation Counsel, the Metropolitan
Police Department, the Department of Health, and
other offices determined by the Mayor) are available
on-site at the Family Court to coordinate the provi-
HR 2657 RFS
sion of such services and information regarding such
services to such individuals and families.
‘‘(2) DUTIES
OF
HEADS
OF
OFFICES.—The
head of each office described in paragraph (1), in-
cluding the Superintendent of the District of Colum-
bia Public Schools and the Director of the District
of Columbia Housing Authority, shall provide the
Mayor with such information, assistance, and serv-
ices as the Mayor may require to carry out such
paragraph.
‘‘(b) APPOINTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES LIAISON
WITH FAMILY COURT.—The Mayor of the District of Co-
lumbia shall appoint an individual to serve as a liaison
between the Family Court and the District government for
purposes of subsection (a) and for coordinating the deliv-
ery of services provided by the District government with
the activities of the Family Court and for providing infor-
mation to the judges, magistrate judges, and nonjudicial
personnel of the Court regarding the services available
from the District government to the individuals and fami-
lies served by the Court. The Mayor shall provide on an
ongoing basis information to the chief judge of the Supe-
rior Court and the presiding judge of the Family Court
regarding the services of the District government which
HR 2657 RFS
are available for the individuals and families served by the
Family Court.
‘‘(c) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There
are authorized to be appropriated to the Mayor of the Dis-
trict of Columbia for each fiscal year such sums as may
be necessary to carry out this section.
‘‘§ 11–1106. Reports to Congress.
‘‘Not later than 90 days after the end of each cal-
endar year, the chief judge of the Superior Court shall
submit a report to Congress on the activities of the Family
Court during the year, and shall include in the report the
following:
‘‘(1) The chief judge’s assessment of the pro-
ductivity and success of the use of alternative dis-
pute resolution pursuant to section 11–1102.
‘‘(2) Goals and timetables to improve the Fam-
ily Court’s performance in the following year.
‘‘(3) Information on the extent to which the
Court met deadlines and standards applicable under
Federal and District of Columbia law to the review
and disposition of actions and proceedings under the
Court’s jurisdiction during the year.
‘‘(4) Information on the progress made in find-
ing and utilizing suitable locations and space for the
Family Court.
HR 2657 RFS
‘‘(5) Information on any factors which are not
under the control of the Family Court which inter-
fere with or prevent the Court from carrying out its
responsibilities in the most effective manner possible.
‘‘(6) Based on outcome measures derived
through the use of the information stored in elec-
tronic format under section 11–1104(d), an analysis
of the Court’s efficiency and effectiveness in man-
aging its case load during the year, including an
analysis of the time required to dispose of actions
and proceedings among the various categories of the
Court’s jurisdiction, as prescribed by applicable law
and best practices, including (but not limited to)
best practices developed by the American Bar Asso-
ciation and the National Council of Juvenile and
Family Court Judges.
‘‘(7) If the Court failed to meet the deadlines,
standards, and outcome measures described in the
previous paragraphs, a proposed remedial action
plan to address the failure.’’.
(b) EXPEDITED APPEALS
FOR CERTAIN FAMILY
COURT ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS.—Section 11–721,
District of Columbia Code, is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
HR 2657 RFS
‘‘(g) Any appeal from an order of the Family Court
of the District of Columbia terminating parental rights or
granting or denying a petition to adopt shall receive expe-
dited review by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
and shall be certified by the appellant.’’.
(c) PLAN FOR INTEGRATING COMPUTER SYSTEMS.—
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Not later than 6 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Mayor of the District of Columbia shall submit to
the President and Congress a plan for integrating
the computer systems of the District government
with the computer systems of the Superior Court of
the District of Columbia so that the Family Court
of the Superior Court and the appropriate offices of
the District government which provide social services
and other related services to individuals and families
served by the Family Court of the Superior Court
(including the District of Columbia Public Schools,
the District of Columbia Housing Authority, the
Child and Family Services Agency, the Office of the
Corporation Counsel, the Metropolitan Police De-
partment, the Department of Health, and other of-
fices determined by the Mayor) will be able to access
and share information on the individuals and fami-
lies served by the Family Court.
HR 2657 RFS
(2) AUTHORIZATION
OF
APPROPRIATIONS.—
There are authorized to be appropriated to the
Mayor of the District of Columbia such sums as may
be necessary to carry out paragraph (1).
(d) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections
for chapter 11 of title 11, District of Columbia Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following new items:
‘‘11–1102. Use of alternative dispute resolution.
‘‘11–1103. Standards of practice for appointed counsel.
‘‘11–1104. Administration.
‘‘11–1105. Social services and other related services.
‘‘11–1106. Reports to Congress.’’.
SEC. 5. TREATMENT OF HEARING COMMISSIONERS AS
MAGISTRATE JUDGES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—
(1) REDESIGNATION
OF
TITLE.—Section 11–
1732, District of Columbia Code, is amended—
(A) by striking ‘‘hearing commissioners’’
each place it appears in subsection (a), sub-
section (b), subsection (d), subsection (i), sub-
section (l), and subsection (n) and inserting
‘‘magistrate judges’’;
(B) by striking ‘‘hearing commissioner’’
each place it appears in subsection (b), sub-
section (c), subsection (e), subsection (f), sub-
section (g), subsection (h), and subsection (j)
and inserting ‘‘magistrate judge’’;
HR 2657 RFS
(C) by striking ‘‘hearing commissioner’s’’
each place it appears in subsection (e) and sub-
section (k) and inserting ‘‘magistrate judge’s’’;
(D) by striking ‘‘Hearing commissioners’’
each place it appears in subsections (b), (d),
and (i) and inserting ‘‘Magistrate judges’’; and
(E) in the heading, by striking ‘‘Hearing
commissioners’’ 
and 
inserting 
‘‘Mag-
istrate Judges’’.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—(A) Section
11–1732(c)(3), District of Columbia Code, is amend-
ed by striking ‘‘, except that’’ and all that follows
and inserting a period.
(B) Section 16–924, District of Columbia Code,
is amended—
(i) by striking ‘‘hearing commissioner’’
each place it appears and inserting ‘‘magistrate
judge’’; and
(ii) in subsection (f), by striking ‘‘hearing
commissioner’s’’ 
and 
inserting 
‘‘magistrate
judge’s’’.
(3) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The item relating
to section 11–1732 of the table of sections of chap-
ter 17 of title 11, D.C. Code, is amended to read as
follows:
‘‘11–1732. Magistrate judges.’’.
HR 2657 RFS
(b) TRANSITION PROVISION REGARDING HEARING
COMMISSIONERS.—Any individual serving as a hearing
commissioner under section 11–1732 of the District of Co-
lumbia Code as of the date of the enactment of this Act
shall serve the remainder of such individual’s term as a
magistrate judge, and may be reappointed as a magistrate
judge in accordance with section 11–1732(d), District of
Columbia Code, except that any individual serving as a
hearing commissioner as of the date of the enactment of
this Act who was appointed as a hearing commissioner
prior to the effective date of section 11–1732 of the Dis-
trict of Columbia Code shall not be required to be a resi-
dent of the District of Columbia to be eligible to be re-
appointed.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by
this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment
of this Act.
SEC. 6. SPECIAL RULES FOR MAGISTRATE JUDGES OF FAM-
ILY COURT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 17 of title 11, District
of Columbia Code, is amended by inserting after section
11–1732 the following new section:
HR 2657 RFS
‘‘§ 11–1732A. Special rules for magistrate judges of
Family Court of the Superior Court.
‘‘(a) USE OF SOCIAL WORKERS IN ADVISORY MERIT
SELECTION PANEL.—The advisory selection merit panel
used in the selection of magistrate judges for the Family
Court of the Superior Court under section 11–1732(b)
shall include certified social workers specializing in child
welfare matters who are residents of the District and who
are not employees of the District of Columbia Courts.
‘‘(b) SPECIAL
QUALIFICATIONS.—Notwithstanding
section 11–1732(c), no individual shall be appointed as a
magistrate judge for the Family Court of the Superior
Court unless that individual—
‘‘(1) is a citizen of the United States;
‘‘(2) is an active member of the unified District
of Columbia Bar;
‘‘(3) for the 5 years immediately preceding the
appointment has been engaged in the active practice
of law in the District, has been on the faculty of a
law school in the District, or has been employed as
a lawyer by the United States or District govern-
ment, or any combination thereof;
‘‘(4) has not fewer than 3 years of training or
experience in the practice of family law; and
‘‘(5) is a bona fide resident of the District of
Columbia and has maintained an actual place of
HR 2657 RFS
abode in the District for at least 90 days imme-
diately prior to appointment (or becomes a bona fide
resident of the District of Columbia and maintains
an actual place of abode in the District not later
than 90 days after appointment), and retains such
residency during service as a magistrate.
‘‘(c) SERVICE
OF
CURRENT
HEARING
COMMIS-
SIONERS.—Those individuals serving as hearing commis-
sioners under section 11–1732 on the effective date of this
section who meet the qualifications described in subsection
(b)(4) may request to be appointed as magistrate judges
for the Family Court of the Superior Court under such
section.
‘‘(d) FUNCTIONS.—A magistrate judge, when specifi-
cally designated by the presiding judge of the Family
Court of the Superior Court, and subject to the rules of
the Superior Court and the right of review under section
11–1732(k), may perform the following functions:
‘‘(1) Administer oaths and affirmations and
take acknowledgements.
‘‘(2) Subject to the rules of the Superior Court
and applicable Federal and District of Columbia law,
conduct hearings, make findings and enter interim
and final orders or judgments in uncontested or con-
tested proceedings within the jurisdiction of the