PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 18, 1994
Judicial Amendments Act of 1994 - Amends the Federal judicial code to make moneys in the Judiciary Automation Fund available to the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts for: (1) the procurement of automatic data processing equipment (equipment) for program activities included in the courts of appeals, district courts, and other judicial services account of the judicial branch; and (2) support personnel in the courts and in the Administrative Office. Authorizes all agencies of the judiciary to make deposits into the Fund. Requires the Director to develop and annually revise a long range plan for meeting the equipment needs of the activities funded, including an annual estimate of certain fees that may be collected under the Judiciary Appropriations Act, 1991. Provides for the deposit into the Fund of such fees. Requires the Director's annual report to the Congress on the operation of the Fund to include: (1) the specific actions taken and progress made to improve the plan developed, the long range automation plan, and the strategic business plan; and (2) a comparison of planned and actual Fund expenditures and accomplishments and reasons for any delays in scheduled systems development or budget overruns. Authorizes the Director to transfer amounts up to $1 million from the Fund into the account to which the Funds were originally appropriated, with amounts in excess of that sum in any fiscal year permitted to be transferred only by following specified reprogramming procedures. Requires the Director to: (1) develop an overall strategic business plan which would identify the judiciary's missions, goals, and objectives, and a long range automation plan based on the strategic business plan and user needs assessments; (2) establish effective Administrative Office oversight of court automation efforts; (3) expedited efforts to complete the development and implementation of life cycle management standards; (4) utilize the standards in developing the next generation of case management and financial systems; and (5) assess the current utilization and future user requirements of the data communications network. Amends: (1) the Judicial Improvements and Access to Justice Act to authorize appropriations for court arbitration; and (2) the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 to extend civil justice expense and delay reduction pilot programs.
People & committees
Sen. Heflin, Howell [D-AL] · D–AL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 103-420.
Became Public Law No: 103-420.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Mr. Brooks asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H11295-11297)
Committee on Judiciary discharged.
Committee on Judiciary discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration.
Referred to the House Committee on Judiciary.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S12104-12107)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S12104-12107)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 16, 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 S.2407 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.2407 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.2407 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.2407 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.