Durbin, Welch, Ossoff, Booker, and Hirono Lead 18 of their Colleagues in Letter to Senate Appropriations Committee Leaders Urging Corrections to Proposed Federal Defenders’ Funding

Statement

“Federal Public and Community Defenders are fundamental to the function of federal courts across the country. To preserve the operation of our justice system, we urge you to pass funding for Defender Services that is at a minimum $108 million higher than the House mark and $136 million more than the Senate mark in the Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) appropriations bill for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024. This funding level of $1.519 billion is necessary to simply maintain current operations by the Federal Defenders and would still result in the program foregoing necessary training and information technology (IT) improvements.”?

Without addressing this gap in funding, Federal Defenders have estimated that funding at the current House or Senate marks would, conservatively, result in a 9-12% reduction in their current workforce. Federal Defenders are already approximately 100 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions below FY23 authorized staffing and approximately 400 FTEs below the level recommended by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts’ most recent work management study. An overwhelming majority of the Federal Defender budget is dedicated to personnel and space. Cuts to federal funding will directly impact employees, leading to a reduction in the number of paralegals, investigators, and attorneys.

Nearly 9 in 10 individuals charged with a federal crime cannot afford legal representation and thus are constitutionally entitled to appointed counsel. Preserving the public defender workforce is essential to our justice system. Because the Constitution requires the court to appoint counsel for individuals who cannot afford a lawyer, if there are fewer public defenders available, the court must refer more cases to private attorneys on the Criminal Justice Act panel. Although panel attorneys are dedicated to the public defense function, sending excess cases to the panel often incurs higher costs....Consequently, decreasing the Federal Defender budget may in fact increase costs on the federal judiciary, paradoxically costing the federal government more.

Congress should follow through on its Constitutional responsibility to adequately fund federal public defense. We urge you to provide adequate funding for Defender Services in both chambers’ FSGG legislation or through supplemental appropriations legislation Congress may consider. Correcting the potential shortfall by providing at least $108 million more than the House bill and $136 million more than the Senate bill to Defender Services will, at a bare minimum, maintain the right to counsel in federal court and continue the bipartisan support this program has historically received."

Source