PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-121.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · May 25, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House passed version is repeated here.)
Temporary Bankruptcy Judgeships Extension Act of 2012 - (Sec. 2) Extends the temporary office of certain bankruptcy judgeships authorized or extended under the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 1992 and Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2005 until applicable vacancies identified in this Act occur in the office of a bankruptcy judge for specified districts in California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Nevada.
Prohibits filling specified bankruptcy judge vacancies in such districts occurring more than five years after enactment of this Act and resulting from the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of a bankruptcy judge (thus extending the lapse date under current law by five years).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Increases by a specified amount the bankruptcy filing fee for a case commenced under chapter 11 (Reorganization) that does not concern a railroad. Requires that certain incremental amounts collected by reason of such increased fees be: (1) deposited in a special fund in the Treasury; and (2) made available to offset funds appropriated for the operation and maintenance of U.S. courts, but only to the extent specifically appropriated by an Act enacted after enactment of this Act.
Reduces the percentage of such fees to be deposited as offsetting collections to the U.S. Trustee System Fund (funds available to the Attorney General for operations of U.S. trustees). Increases the percentage of chapter 7 (Liquidation) and 13 (Adjustment of Debts of an Individual with Regular Income) fees to be deposited as offsetting receipts to remain available to the Judiciary for expenses, services, and administration of U.S. courts.
(Sec. 4) Requires Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate, prior to further reauthorization of any judgeship authorized by this Act, to: (1) conduct a review of the bankruptcy judgeships authorized by this Act to determine the need for continued reauthorization of each judgeship; (2) evaluate any changes in all bankruptcy case filings and the effect on filing fee revenue; and (3) require the Administrative Office of the Courts to submit a report on bankruptcy case workload, bankruptcy judgeship costs, and filing fee revenue.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-121.
Became Public Law No: 112-121.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3102-3103)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3102-3103)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection. (text: CR H2492-2493)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text: CR H2492-2493)
Mr. Coble asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H2492-2493)
Committee on Judiciary discharged.
Committee on Judiciary discharged.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4967 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4967 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4967 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4967 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.