|
|
|
Your location: Judicial Independence :: Judicial Salaries
Judicial Salaries
Summary
A discussion of the effect of salaries on judicial independence.
|
The U.S. Constitution guarantees that a federal judge’s salary will not be reduced. [i] Even with this Constitutional protection, several situations surrounding judicial salaries can potentially threaten judicial independence. Judges’ salaries cannot be increased except with the approval of Congress, and Congress can only consider pay raises for federal judges when they are tied to pay increase requests of members of Congress and certain highly paid executive branch employees. The result is that reluctance by members of Congress to approve pay raises for themselves out of fear of adverse public reaction causes federal judges to be refused pay raises as well.
The seriously diminished opportunity for federal judges to receive pay raises is aggravated by the impact of inflation. Judicial salaries topped out in 1969 and have decreased in value since then because of inflation. [ii] Judges want to categorize pay increases as cost of living adjustments. [iii] This characterization is more on point because of the effect of inflation on judicial salaries. Chief Justice William Rehnquist has said that “there is, ‘a paradox of judicial independence in the U.S.: We have as independent a judiciary as I know of in any democracy,’ yet judges depend on Congress and the President for laws to help improve the system.” [iv]
Broader concerns are raised by the diminished value of judicial salaries. Some judges fear that the lack of competitive pay will cause fewer qualified candidates to be interested in the judiciary as a career path. Similarly, some fear that insufficient salaries will cause experienced judges to retire in order to seek more lucrative career options, leaving inexperienced newcomers to manage heavy caseloads exacerbated by the loss of judges. [v]
[i] U.S. Constitution, article III, §1.
[ii] For more information see: Federal Judicial Salaries: A Critical Appraisal, Christopher E. Smith, 62 Temp. L. Rev. 849 (1989); A Plea For More Money Comes From the Federal Bench, Saundra Torry, The Washington Post, Monday, June 23, 1997; Congress Politics may Stand In Way of Pay Increases For Federal Judges, Richard Carelli, The Journal Record, Monday, March 24, 1997.
[iii] For more information see: Congress May Forgo Pay Raise Legislators Could Block Increase For Federal Judges, Jackie Koszczuk and Dan Carney, Rocky Mountain News, Sunday, June 22, 1997; A Plea For More Money Comes From the Federal Bench, Saundra Torry, The Washington Post, Monday, June 23, 1997.
[iv] Chief Justice Urges Congress to Give Cost-of-Living Raises to Federal Judges, Associated Press, Rocky Mountain News, Wednesday, January 1, 1997.
[v] For more information see: Bailing From the Bench, William C. Smith, ABA Journal, May 1999.
|
|
| AJS Video |
This five-minute video conveys the history and essence of the mission & work of AJS. View video. |
|