Skip to main content

Why are the billionaires always laughing?

Because they know the corporate media will never call bullshit on their bullshit.

Why are the billionaires laughing?

It’s easy to laugh when the corporate press treats you as a glorious success instead of the epitome of a broken social order. They laugh because they know the corporate media prefers to fawn over them rather than hold them to account.

Today, we ask you to support our nonprofit journalism because we are not impressed by billionaires flying into space, their corporations despoiling our health and planet, or their vast fortunes safely concealed in tax havens across the globe. We are not laughing.

We are hard at work digging out the truth. Please support this independent journalism today by donating to our critical Fall Campaign. We cannot do it without you. Thank you. -- Craig Brown, Co-founder

Support Our Work -- Join the small group of generous readers who donate, keeping Common Dreams free for millions of people each year. Every donation—large or small—helps us bring you the news that matters.

For Immediate Release

Press Release

25 Progressive Organizations Call on Senate To Add Seats To the Circuit and District Courts

Letter calls for expansion of federal courts to deal with workload crisis and increase diversity on the federal courts.

More than two dozen progressive organizations have sent a letter to leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee calling for the creation of new federal judgeships. Many of the organizations are endorsing circuit and district court expansion for the first time.

Congress has not significantly increased the number of new judgeships in the United States since 1990. The letter argues that “Congress’ failure to create new judgeships has devastated the ability of our courts to fulfill the promise of equal justice under the law and exacerbated existing inequalities in our system.” It also says that the Judicial Conference’s recommendations for expanding the number of judgeships are “insufficient to meet today’s crisis in our courts” and that the expansion should go beyond those recommendations. The letter also emphasizes that “adding judgeships also presents an additional opportunity to improve judicial diversity, a crisis that has reached historic proportions under the Trump administration.”

The Democratic Party’s 2020 platform recognizes, for the first time, the need to expand the number of circuit and district court judgeships, although this letter argues for a greater expansion than the platform.  

The letter is signed by the following organizations:

  • Alliance for Justice
  • American Association for Justice
  • American Atheists
  • American Federation of Teachers (AFT)
  • American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
  • Center for Popular Democracy Action
  • Constitutional Accountability Center
  • Demand Justice
  • Demand Progress
  • Freedom From Religion Foundation
  • Giffords
  • IndivisAbility
  • Indivisible
  • League of Conservation Voters
  • National Council of Jewish Women
  • National Education Association (NEA)
  • National Employment Lawyers Association
  • National Equality Action Team (NEAT)
  • People's Parity Project
  • Revolving Door Project
  • Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
  • Stand Up America
  • Take Back The Court
  • The Immigration Hub
  • United We Dream

A copy of the letter is below.

Dear Chairman Graham and Ranking Member Feinstein:

We write to urge you to create enough additional judgeships in our federal district and circuit courts to allow our judiciary to adequately serve the American people. We were pleased to see bipartisan agreement on the need for more seats at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s June 30th hearing, but urge you to take action sufficient to address the problem.

Our overwhelmed judicial branch is a crisis decades in the making. While Congress regularly increased the number of judges on the federal bench to keep pace with our booming population and growing number of cases over the course of the 20th century, for the past 30 years, the creation of new judgeships has largely stalled. Because our judiciary has too few judges, struggling to manage too many cases, the administration of justice is being undermined in this country.

We appreciate that the Committee is considering the recommendations by the Judicial Conference, headed by Chief Justice John Roberts, to create new judgeships. The Conference’s recommendations unfortunately have been unheeded for decades, and as a result, the overwhelmed dockets of our federal courts have limited access to justice and effectively block many Americans from seeking relief for civil wrongs.

However, the Judicial Conference’s recommendations are only a first step, insufficient to meet today’s crisis in our courts. The U.S. population has grown by nearly a third since the last time Congress comprehensively addressed the number of judgeships in 1990, but the Conference only recommends an 8 percent increase in judgeships.

Caseload statistics also support a more robust approach. While the Conference recommends increasing district court judgeships by less than 10 percent, filings in our district courts have increased by roughly 40 percent since 1990. Similarly, the Conference only would increase circuit court judgeships by 3 percent, while circuit court filings have grown by 15 percent. Judge Brian Miller’s testimony to your Committee conceded that “Even with these additional judgeships, weighted filings would be 475 per judgeship or higher [10 percent higher than the Conference’s benchmark] in 14 district courts.”

Even if Congress adopted the Judicial Conference’s recommendations in full and added 8 percent to our judiciary, it would be the smallest increase in a comprehensive judgeship bill in modern history. From 1960 to 1990, Congress passed six comprehensive judgeship bills -- each one increasing the size of the judiciary by at least 12 percent, with no more than eight years between laws. Our current, 30-year period of inattention requires a much greater response.

Congress’ failure to create new judgeships has devastated the ability of our courts to fulfill the promise of equal justice under the law and exacerbated existing inequalities in our system. It encourages defendants to seek plea bargains to avoid jail time while awaiting delayed trials and discourages people without the resources for protracted litigation from filing cases in the first place. Furthermore, our overwhelmed lower courts have led judges to create procedural hurdles and substantive law that keeps civil rights plaintiffs -- especially those bringing employment disputes—out of federal court. Adding judgeships to the lower courts would not only relieve unmanageable caseloads and overworked judges, but would also lay the groundwork for reforms needed to correct for inequalities that plague our system.

Adding judgeships also presents an additional opportunity to improve judicial diversity, a crisis that has reached historic proportions under the Trump administration. By expanding the federal courts, Congress would provide another opportunity to correct course and add judges who represent both the diversity of the nation and the professional diversity of attorneys. An expanded federal bench must include more women, people of color, LGBTQ+ people, and people with disabilities to fill the created seats. Lower court expansion would also increase capacity to nominate lawyers who have represented individuals -- such as indigent defendants, workers, consumers, immigrants, and civil rights plaintiffs -- whose perspective is sorely lacking on our federal benches.

Congress’ failure to add new judgeships for decades is the exception, not the norm, and the historic crisis we face warrants immediate action by this Committee. We are currently living in the longest period of time with no major increase in judgeships since the creation of our modern judicial system in 1891.

Our courts cannot provide the efficient administration of justice in this country without a sufficient number of judges to adequately serve the American people. We cannot accept a status quo that undermines justice, equality, and confidence in our judicial system. Only Congress has the power to address our current crisis, and it must do so with a solution that is large enough to meet our judiciary’s full need.


Demand Justice is a progressive movement fighting to restore the ideological balance and legitimacy of the federal courts by advocating for court reform and vigorously opposing extreme nominees.

After Getting 'Stealth Bailout' During Pandemic, US Corporations Try to Kill Proposed Tax Hikes

"When it's time to finally put workers first, big businesses are spending millions to maintain their advantage and preserve the status quo," said Kyle Herrig of Accountable.US.

Jessica Corbett ·

'Disgraceful': Just 9 Republicans Join With Dems to Hold Steve Bannon in Criminal Contempt

The vote "reveals just how far the Republican Party has fallen" since Trump took control as GOP's de facto leader, said one pro-democracy advocate.

Jon Queally ·

After Months of Organizing, Amazon Workers Ready Union Drive at Staten Island Warehouse

"The energy and culture we built over the last six months with these workers, it's been very strong," said Amazon Labor Union president Chris Smalls. "Everybody's excited."

Kenny Stancil ·

Top Dem Calls on Biden to Toss Legally 'Erroneous' Trump Memo and Ratify Equal Rights Amendment

The renewed push comes nearly 50 years after Congress passed the amendment.

Andrea Germanos ·

Report Details 'Jaw-Dropping' Abuse of Asylum Seekers by US Border Agents

The accounts of 160 asylum officers portray "DHS as an agency that appears to have normalized shocking abuses at the U.S. border."

Julia Conley ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.

Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo