PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2001
Federal Judicial Fairness Act of 2001 - Repeals a Federal provision limiting salary increases for Federal judges or Supreme Court Justices to those specifically authorized by Act of Congress.Amends the Federal judicial code to make the cost of living adjustments in judicial salaries effective in the first pay period beginning on or after January 1 each year (currently, such adjustments are triggered by General Schedule adjustments). Prohibits the percentage adjustment taking effect in a calendar year, in any salary rate, from exceeding that adjustment taking effect in such year under General Schedule pay rate provisions.Increases the rate of basic pay for: (1) the Chief Justice of the United States; (2) an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court; (3) a judge of a U.S. circuit court, a district court, and the U.S. Court of International Trade; (4) a bankruptcy judge; and (5) a full-time magistrate judge.
People & committees
Rep. Biggert, Judy [R-IL-13] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H279)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.570 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.570 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.570 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.570 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.