Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)
District of Columbia Courts Judicial Vacancy Reduction Act
A Democratic bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The District of Columbia Courts Judicial Vacancy Reduction Act changes how judges for District of Columbia courts are appointed. It allows the President to appoint judges from a recommended list without needing the advice and consent of the Senate. Additionally, the District of Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission can appoint judges if the President fails to do so. Congress can still block an appointment by passing a joint resolution of disapproval within a specific 30-calendar-day window.
Yes
- Scored +5
Would people in cities be better off under this?
Directly benefits DC residents by ensuring local courts are fully staffed and operational.
- Scored +4
Does this give the federal government more power?
Shifts appointment power to the President and a commission, reducing the Senate's direct role.
- Scored +3
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Filling judicial vacancies more quickly potentially improves the efficiency of the legal process for litigants.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Faster Filling of Vacancies: By removing the requirement for Senate advice and consent, the President can appoint judges directly from recommended lists, which is intended to reduce judicial vacancies (Section 2).
-
Alternative Appointment Path: If the President does not make an appointment, the District of Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission is empowered to appoint the judge, ensuring the courts remain staffed (Section 2(b)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Reduced Oversight: The bill removes the Senate's role in providing advice and consent for judicial appointments, shifting the power to the President and the Judicial Nomination Commission (Section 2).
-
Delayed Appointments: New appointments do not take effect immediately; they are delayed for a 30-calendar-day period to allow Congress the opportunity to pass a resolution of disapproval (Section 3(a)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Shifts appointment power to the President and a commission, reducing the Senate's direct role. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Filling judicial vacancies more quickly potentially improves the efficiency of the legal process for litigants.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in cities be better off under this? — Directly benefits DC residents by ensuring local courts are fully staffed and operational.
- 6/18/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Angela AlsobrooksDemocrat · Maryland
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey
Timothy KaineDemocrat · Virginia
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California