STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
The federal courts will not be expanding after all. Over the holidays, a bipartisan effort to add new federal judges fell apart. Congress passed the bill to expand the courts over the course of several presidencies, so that neither party would be guaranteed of an advantage in appointing judges, which is what the president does. But the Republican-controlled House did not pass this bill until after Election Day, when it was clear that President-elect Trump would get to go first. Democrats didn't like that, and President Biden then vetoed the bill. The people affected include Randy Crane, the chief judge in the Southern District of Texas. He's been a federal judge for more than 20 years. He was appointed by President George W. Bush. And Crane was an advocate for the bill because of the number of cases that come onto his crowded docket.
RANDY CRANE: So we have two different types of courts. The Houston courthouse and the caseload there is very heavy on civil lawsuits. The remaining border courts are very heavy in criminal caseloads, just a function of their proximity to the border, drug interdiction, alien smuggling interdiction, weapons interdiction.
INSKEEP: I guess we should emphasize there are separate immigration courts, where people will have discussions of their immigration status. This is about crimes, though, that may be related to people crossing the border, right?
CRANE: Correct.
INSKEEP: How has your work and the caseload evolved over the time you've done it?
CRANE: It's grown dramatically. When I began 23 years ago, I was a new judge added to the McAllen division. So instead of one, there were now two judges, with me. I think my annual caseload was maybe 300 cases. And now that - even though we've added a third judge in McAllen, my caseload is over a thousand cases a year. I work through lunch hours, work through - whenever juries are on breaks, I'm hearing cases. Lawyers will come in early, and we just have to work around jury trials.
INSKEEP: There is one part of this which, of course, is you wanting to have a decent workload, but the other part, of course, is delivering justice to people. And I'm thinking of the old saying that justice delayed is justice denied. Are you denying justice to people in some cases?
CRANE: I certainly hope not, but it certainly is justice delayed at times. I really work very hard to try and hear cases that are going to be, for example, time served - hear those quickly so that those people aren't just lingering in jails, waiting for their case to be heard. And unfortunately, some slip through the cracks and end up over-serving their sentences. You know, I always feel terrible when that happens.
INSKEEP: I'm also just thinking about victims of a crime who are waiting for justice, waiting for a resolution. Their lives may feel like they're on hold. I'm thinking about a suspect who may insist that they are innocent, and their lives are on hold while they get to a resolution. This affects people.
CRANE: It does, and there are unfortunately many of those cases on the docket.
INSKEEP: So what did you think about when the Judges Act was proposed and seemed to be working its way through Congress?
CRANE: I was very excited. I've been working on it personally for about two years with my senators here in Texas, who, you know, have been working with senators elsewhere in the country - in California and Delaware primarily. Those were the big sponsors. And we were all very optimistic because it had bipartisan support. This was not a politics issue. It was just a need, you know, a huge need. As populations have swelled in different jurisdictions and criminal caseloads have swelled, we haven't had any increase in judges to correspond to that swell, and so we end up delaying cases. And this seemed like a perfect remedy for that.
INSKEEP: I'm thinking about the way the bill was structured. There are a number of judges to be appointed. They would be appointed over a number of years so that probably more than one president would appoint them. The idea was to pass this before the election, when nobody knew who would get to go first. What did you think of that part of the structure?
CRANE: I thought that was great. I was all in support of it. I was hopeful that would happen. The Senate did not pass it until August. You know, it was unanimous, had good bipartisan support. It was then sent over to the House. And so this just sort of got pushed behind all these other priorities. It's just unfortunate. The reality is that legislation probably is not something that will go into effect until the next administration, and probably the judgeships would start in 2029. In order to get the legislation through politically, that's just how it would have to be.
INSKEEP: Texas Judge Randy Crane, thanks so much.
CRANE: Happy to visit with you. Have a great day. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
