PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Dec 12, 2024
Judicial Understaffing Delays Getting Emergencies Solved Act of 2024 or the JUDGES Act of 2024
This bill creates 63 new permanent U.S. district court judgeships over a 10-year period and 3 temporary U.S. district court judgeships in 2025. The President must appoint, with the advice and consent of the Senate, additional judges for specified judicial districts.
Specifically, the bill creates 63 additional permanent judgeships, which are added every two years from 2025 through 2035. The state and the total number of judgeships added over the 10-year period for the state are as follows:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Arizona (2),
California (21),
Colorado (2),
Delaware (2),
Florida (9),
Georgia (2),
Idaho (1),
Indiana (1),
Iowa (1),
Nebraska (1),
New Jersey (3),
New York (5), and
Texas (13).
Additionally, in 2025, the bill creates three temporary judgeships in Oklahoma.
The bill adds locations for where district courts must be held in certain states. Specifically, the bill requires the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California to be additionally held in El Centro, California; the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Houston Division) to be additionally held in College Station, Texas; and the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (Central Division) to be additionally held in Moab and Monticello, Utah.
The Government Accountability Office must submit reports to Congress on judicial caseloads and detention space.
The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts must make publicly accessible, and submit to Congress, a specified biennial report on judgeship recommendations.
People & committees
Sen. Young, Todd [R-IN] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Veto message received in Senate. Ordered held at the desk.
Vetoed by President.
Vetoed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 236 - 173 (Roll no. 501). (text: CR H7116-7119)
House roll call 501 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 236 - 173 (Roll no. 501). (text: CR H7116-7119)
House roll call 501 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on S. 4199.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7673 and S. 4199. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 7673 and S. 4199 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate on each bill and one motion to recommit on H.R. 7673 and one motion to commit on S. 4199. The resolution also provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5009 with one hour of general debate.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1612. (consideration: CR H7116-7124)
Rule H. Res. 1612 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1612 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7673 and S. 4199. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 7673 and S. 4199 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate on each bill and one motion to recommit on H.R. 7673 and one motion to commit on S. 4199. The resolution also provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5009 with one hour of general debate.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5750-5753; text: CR S5750-5752)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5750-5753; text: CR S5750-5752)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 430.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Coons for Senator Durbin with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Coons for Senator Durbin with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 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.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.4199 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.4199 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.4199 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.4199 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.