PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 31, 1997
Amends the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 to strike provisions relating to the temporary appointment of one additional district judge for the northern district of Alabama. Extends temporary judgeships in: (1) the eastern district of California, the northern district of New York, the eastern district of Virginia, the southern and central districts of Illinois, the eastern district of Missouri, the northern district of Ohio, and the districts of Hawaii, Nebraska, and Kansas until the first vacancy occurring 10 years or more after the confirmation of the judge named to fill such judgeships; and (2) the eastern district of Pennsylvania until the first vacancy occurring five years or more after the confirmation date of the judge named to fill such judgeship.
People & committees
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8575-8576)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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 S.1113 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 S.1113 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 S.1113 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 S.1113 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.