Norton, Van Hollen Introduce Bill to Reduce Vacancies in D.C. Courts

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) and Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) today introduced the District of Columbia Courts Vacancy Reduction Act, which would allow nominees to the local District of Columbia courts to be seated after a 30-day congressional review period, unless a disapproval resolution is enacted into law during that period. Currently, nominees to the local D.C. courts cannot be seated without affirmative Senate confirmation. The bill would make the congressional review process for nominees the same as the one currently used for legislation passed by the D.C. Council. This bill is cosponsored by Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Adam Schiff (D-CA), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD).

"D.C.'s local courts have faced chronic judicial vacancies for far too long, delaying justice for residents and placing an unnecessary strain on the administration of our local court system," Congresswoman Norton said. "Unlike state and local courts elsewhere in the country, the D.C.'s courts are subject to a unique confirmation process that requires Senate action before nominees can take their seats. As a result, highly qualified nominees can languish for months or even years while the Senate prioritizes federal judicial and executive branch nominations.

"This bill would establish a commonsense process to ensure that qualified nominees are not indefinitely delayed by Senate inaction. By allowing nominees to be seated after the same 30-day congressional review period that applies to D.C. legislation, this bill would help reduce vacancies, improve the efficiency of the courts, and ensure that D.C. residents have timely access to justice."

"The District of Columbia deserves a fully functional justice system as is afforded to each of our states. The current system has hamstrung the District's local courts - leaving the city with judicial vacancies that often take years to fill due to congressional inaction. This shortage of judges has led to slower judicial proceeding and a serious backlog of criminal and civil cases. This legislation would limit congressional interference in D.C.'s court system, helping to better ensure the District's residents have a justice system that works for them," said Senator Van Hollen.

Norton's introductory statement follows.

Statement of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton on the Introduction of the District of Columbia Courts Judicial Vacancy Reduction Act

June 18, 2026

Today, I introduce the District of Columbia Courts Judicial Vacancy Reduction Act, which would expedite the appointment of local D.C. judges. Senator Chris Van Hollen is introducing the companion bill.

The longstanding judicial vacancy crisis in the local D.C. courts has existed regardless of which party controls the presidency and the Senate because the president and the Senate are, understandably, more focused on nominees to the federal courts and the executive branch than to the local D.C. courts. The sole purpose of this bill is to protect public safety and promote justice by ending the judicial vacancy crisis in the local D.C. courts, which delays the resolution of criminal and civil cases. This bill has nothing to do with D.C. statehood or home rule. Although D.C. will control the local D.C. courts when it becomes a state and Congress can-and should-give D.C. control over the local D.C. courts now, this bill would not give D.C. any new authority over the local D.C. courts.

Under the D.C. Home Rule Act, D.C. has no control over the organization or jurisdiction of the local D.C. courts, including the nomination and appointment of judges. A seven-member commission, which is comprised of federal, D.C. and private-sector appointees, submits to the president a list of three persons for each vacancy on the local D.C. courts. The president must nominate, and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint one person from the list. If the president fails to nominate one of the persons from the list within 60 days, the commission must nominate, and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint one of the persons from the list.

This bill would not change the role of the president or the commission in the appointment of local D.C. judges. Instead, it would apply the current congressional review process for bills enacted by D.C. to the appointment of local D.C. judges. Upon nomination, local D.C. judges would be appointed after the expiration of a 30-day congressional review period, unless a resolution disapproving of the appointment was enacted into law during the period.

Local D.C. judges are non-Article III judges. The Constitution only requires Senate approval of Article III judges-that is, judges on the federal district courts, the federal appeals courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress has the discretion to decide how non-Article III judges will be appointed, and it has chosen to subject some non-Article III judges to Senate approval, but not others. For example, Congress has not given itself any role in the appointment of bankruptcy or administrative law judges. This bill would strike a middle ground. Congress would retain authority to block the appointment of local D.C. judges, but it would only have a limited period to do so.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

###