BILL NUMBER: S8192
SPONSOR: CLEARE
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the judiciary law, in relation to the sufficiency of the
number of judges and justices in districts and courts
 
PURPOSE:
This bill would amend the Judiciary Law to create a regular systematic
assessment of the courts' specific judicial needs in each district and
require the Chief Administrative Judge to analyze the number of judges
and justices in each court and request changes when appropriate.
 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
Section one would create a new section in the Judiciary Law that would
empower the legislature to create a regular systematic assessment of the
courts' specific judicial needs.
Section two would require the Chief Administrative Judge to analyze the
number of judges and justices in each court and request adjustments as
necessary.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
Each court in New York State should have the right number of judges to
perform its duties and provide justice to the people of the State, and
there must be an adequate number of judges to provide civil litigants
with access to the court and to assure that all parties in criminal
cases are able to pursue justice in the courts. It is vital that New
York take a more deliberate approach in assigning judges in each judi-
cial district. To that end, we must codify a regular systematic assess-
ment of the courts' specific needs as many other states and the federal
courts have done.
The Chief Administrative Judge plays a role in this process and should
be tasked with the responsibility to evaluate the adequacy of current
judicial resources and issue a report to the Legislature setting forth
their findings and recommendations, so that the Legislature may carry
out its function. While New York State's Chief Administrative Judge has
the duty to keep and report data for the Unified Court System under the
Judiciary Law, they merely have the option to request a change in the
number of judges as needed. The Chief Administrative Judge does not have
the duty to request a change in the number of judges. Without a clear
mandate requiring the Chief Administrative Judge to evaluate and recom-
mend adjustments, it is unlikely that such requests for additional judg-
es will be made.
The Chief Administrative Judge's statutory responsibility to annually
evaluate the adequacy of current court resources and issue an annual
report should include a directive to analyze the number of judges in
each court and request changes when appropriate-something not currently
required in the reporting process. This annual report would inform the
Legislature in carrying out its constitutional duty to set the number of
judicial seats in each court, giving the court responsibility to
initially identify the need to change the number of, judicial seats.
Whether the courts are operating at peak efficiency should be determined
through data and analysis, not speculation.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
A10041 of 2023/2024
A10041 - amend and recommit to judiciary
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect 180 days after passage.

Statutes affected:
S8192: 212 judiciary law, 212(1) judiciary law