PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 11, 2003
Federal Judgeship Act of 2003 - Directs the President to appoint specified additional: (1) permanent circuit judges for the first, second, sixth, and ninth circuit courts of appeals, and temporary circuit judges for the ninth circuit; and (2) permanent district judges for various districts in Alabama, California, Florida, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Virginia, and Washington, and temporary district judges for California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, New Mexico, New York, and Utah.
Amends the Federal judicial code to establish Article III courts in the Northern Mariana Islands (with court held at Saipan) and in the Virgin Islands (with court held in Christiansted for the Saint Croix Division, and in Charlotte-Amalie for the Saint Thomas and Saint John Division).
Authorizes the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to assign judges of courts of record of the Northern Mariana Islands or Guam to serve temporarily as a judge in the U.S. district court for the district of the Northern Mariana Islands whenever necessary. Grants such judges the powers of magistrate judges.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Includes the district courts of the Northern Mariana Islands and the Virgin Islands within the scope of provisions regarding participation in judicial conferences and regarding annuities for survivors of judicial officials.
Amends the Revised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands to grant the District court of the Virgin Islands exclusive jurisdiction over all criminal and civil proceedings in the Virgin Islands with respect to income tax laws applicable to the Virgin Islands, with exceptions.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.
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.920 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.920 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.920 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.920 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.