PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 471.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Jul 21, 2010
Temporary Judgeships and Bankruptcy Judgeships Act of 2010 - Title I: Temporary Judgeships For District Courts - (Sec. 101) Requires the President to appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, one additional district judge for the eastern district of California and one additional district judge for the district of Nebraska.
Prohibits filling of the first vacancy in the office of district judge in each of the offices of district judge authorized by this Act occurring 10 years or more after the confirmation of the judge named to fill the temporary district judgeship created by this Act.
Amends the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 to extend the temporary judgeships in the district of Hawaii, the district of Kansas, and the northern district of Ohio.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act to declare that the first vacancy in the office of district judge in the district of Arizona, the central district of California, and the eastern district of Texas authorized by this Act, occurring 20 years or more after the confirmation date of the judge named to fill the temporary district judgeship created in the applicable district by this Act, shall not be filled.
Title II: Bankruptcy Judgeships - Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2010 - (Sec. 202) Amends the federal judicial code to authorize the appointment of additional permanent bankruptcy judges in various states.
(Sec. 203) Converts certain temporary offices of bankruptcy judges to permanent offices in specified states.
(Sec. 204) Extends certain temporary offices of bankruptcy judges previously authorized for Pennsylvania and North Carolina.
(Sec. 205) Increases bankruptcy filing fees.
Reduces the amount of bankruptcy fees to be deposited as offsetting collections to the United States Trustee System Fund.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 471.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S257)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S257)
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.193 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.193 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.193 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.193 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.