|
|
 |
|
Legislation Resolutions
Regarding Deportability and State Courts -
1996 MY
Credit Card Surcharges and State Courts - 1995 AM
Legal Services Corporation - 1995 AM
In Support of CCJ/COSCA Policy
Statement on Child Support and State Courts - 1994 MY
In Support of CCJ Resolution
Concerning the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 - 1994 MY
In Support of Recommendations of CCJ Regarding
the Senate Version of H.R. 3355 (particularly the provisions related to
drugs) - 1994 MY
In Opposition to the Passage of
the Violent Crime Control Act - 1991 AM
In Support of the Adoption of the Amendment to
the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 - 1989 AM
Urging Congress to Take No Action Regarding the
Powell Committee Report ( on habeas corpous) Until It Receives the Input
of the Full Judicial Conference - 1989 AM
In Support of Guidelines for AIDS Legislation -
1987 AM
In Support of Amendment to S. 1730 (exemption
from Social Security coverage for retired Federal Judges on active duty) -
1986 AM
In Support of the Purpose Propounded by the State
Justice Institute Act of 1984 - 1984 AM
In Support of Funding of the State Justice
Institute - 1983 MY
Resolution Regarding Deportability and
State Courts
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Senate is presently considering the passage of S.
1664, entitled the "Immigration Control and Financial Responsibility
Act of 1996", as reported by the Committee on the Judiciary on March
21, 1996; and,
WHEREAS, 1664 contains the following language in Section 165 (a)
(B):
"(5) STATE COURT FINDING OF DEPORTABILITY, - (A) On motion of the
prosecution or on the court's own motion, any State court with
jurisdiction to enter judgments in criminal cases is authorized to make a
finding that the defendant is deportable . .
That finding, when incorporated in a final judgment of conviction, shall
for all purposes be conclusive on the alien and may not be reexamined by
any agency or court, whether by habeas corpus or otherwise. The court
shall notify the Attorney General of any finding of deportability." ;
and,
WHEREAS, this provision has the potential for a vast increase in
new state court litigation of complex federal deportation law that could
overwhelm state trial and appellate courts; and
WHEREAS, S. 1664 does not provide funding for state court systems
to undertake this new and complicated litigation and therefore would be a
substantially unfunded Federal mandate on the state court systems.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges
Association, does go on record in opposition to the passage of S. 1664 if
Section 165(a)(B) is retained in the Bill and the American Judges
Association strongly urges the Senate or the Conference Committee on the
Bill to delete this provision from the Bill.
Duly adopted by the Board of Governors of the American Judges
Association at the 1996 Midyear Meeting in Santa Fe, New Mexico on April
19,1996.
AJA Resolutions Committee
Hon. Bertram J. Gaynor, Vice Chair
Hon. George Greig
Hon. Leslie G. Johnson
Hon. Ira J. Raab, Chair
So ordered: Hon. Martin E. Kravarik, President
Credit Card Surcharges and State Courts
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association feels that it would be
convenient for the public to be able to pay their taxes, motor vehicle
registration fees and fines or other criminal or civil penalties by credit
card; and
WHEREAS, the bylaws of VISA, MasterCard and most credit card
companies prohibit all card acceptors, including government agencies, from
passing the cost of credit card transactions directly on to the customer
using the credit card; and
WHEREAS, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for governmental
agencies to absorb the current surcharge fee.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges
Association, supports the adoption of H.R. 1169 so as to grant federal,
state and local governments, including courts, the option to collect the
surcharge fee from the individuals who desire to pay their taxes and fees.
Adopted at the 1995 Annual Conference on October 12, 1995.
Hon. Leslie G. Johnson
AJA Resolutions Committee
Hon. Bertram J. Gaynor
Hon. Anthony Johnson
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Legal Services Corporation
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association and its members are deeply
concerned about the efficient and fair operation of our court system; and
WHEREAS, the Legal Services Corporation provides a wide range of
services to those otherwise unable to afford legal representation; and
WHEREAS, the Congress of the United States is now debating the
future of the Legal Services Corporation.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges
Association, supports the continued funding of the Legal Services
Corporation at a level which will allow the Corporation to continue to
provide the services which is presently provides;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association, urges
Congress to provide funding as presently provided instead of through the
method of block grants to states.
Adopted at the 1995 Annual Conference on October 12, 1995.
Hon. Leslie G. Johnson
AJA Resolutions Committee
Hon. Bertram J. Gaynor
Hon. Anthony Johnson
Hon. Ira J. Raab
In Support of CCJ/COSCA: A
Policy Statement on Child Support and State Courts
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association and its members are
vitally interested in all matters which pertain to the courts and the
dispensing of justice, and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association by and through its Board
of Governors has studied and agrees with a policy statement on child
support and state courts adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices and
the Conference of State Court Administrators in February, 1994, which
reads as follows:
Effective administrative of child support is vital to children and
families who depend on it, and by extension, to society at large.
Achieving this goal requires a determined effort by government agencies,
communities and courts who must work in an integrated manner and as equal
partners. The Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State
Court Administrators, as the leadership voice for state courts, are
committed to participating in this mission.
Public policy, and funding to support the policy, must balance the needs
of administrative and judicial entities and reflect the different service
delivery methods that exist. Ideally, judicial involvement in child
support ought to be focused on those functions where it will have the most
impact in a cost and time efficient manner. Where administrative services
are more effective, they ought to be used.
The Conference of Chief of Justices and the Conference of State Court
Administrators are committed to work for needed legislative and regulatory
reforms, and support:
- federal policy recognizing state courts as partners in identifying
problems and solutions in the child support area;
- realistic incentives, rather than unfunded mandates, designed to
improve intrastate and interstate child support enforcement services;
and
- the preservation and strengthening of state-based child support
enforcement systems, supplemented, where appropriate, by services
available through federal agencies.
The Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court
Administrators call upon federal, state and local legislative bodies to:
recognize the need for effective programs; to identify the appropriate
roles of the various entities providing services; to distinguish between
what does and does not work; and, to make resources available that
complement effective service delivery to children and families in need.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges
Association, agrees with the policy statement on child support and state
courts adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of
State Court Administrators in February, 1994 and lends its endorsement and
support to this policy statement and further urges any and all necessary
action for the implementation of this policy statement.
Adopted at the Midyear Meeting April 1994 in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Hon. Leslie G. Johnson, Chair
AJA Resolutions Committee
Rupert Doan
Charles Flemming
Bertram J. Gaynor
Thomas Mali
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Mortimer Rogers
In Support of CCJ Resolution
Concerning the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association and its members are
vitally interested in all matters which pertaining to the courts including
legislation affecting the courts and the dispensing of justice, and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association is aware that by
Congressional action is pending on the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994, and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association by and through its Board
of Governors has studied Resolution IX adopted by the Conference of Chief
Justices at the seventeenth mid-year meeting in Sea Island, Georgia, on
February 10, 1994, which reads as follows:
WHEREAS, the Senate version on H.R. 3355, which has passed the
Senate and has been sent to conference, would result in the indiscriminate
federalization of crime, the needless disruption of effective state and
local enforcement efforts, and the inefficient use of the special but
limited resources of the federal courts; and
WHEREAS, the state courts and prosecutorial agencies are
responsible for more than 95% of all criminal prosecutions in the United
States, and
WHEREAS, by imposing on State federal standards and programs, the
proposed legislation would curtail the selective use of pretrial
detention, sentencing and parole, and would invalidate principles of
substantive state law - areas in which states have a constitutional
responsibility under the principles of federalism and a long and proven
history of successful initiatives, and
WHEREAS, in addition to contravening principles of federalism, this
legislation is further flawed because it:
- assumes without foundation that states have been unresponsive and
ineffective in addressing crime
- fails to enact plausible solutions of violence, drugs, weapons or
gangs;
- creates an illusion by enacting new criminal law, and
- disrupts funding of state criminal processes by favoring police and
corrections with federal funds while disregarding the need this
creates for commensurate resources for courts, prosecutors and defense
counsel; and
WHEREAS, the command of the 10th Amendment encourages each state
to serve as a laboratory for development of legal remedies and principles
in criminal and civil law, without intrusion of federal authority.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Conference of Chief
Justices:
strongly believes that the problems of crime in our nation must be
addressed in a meaningful way to provide resources and reinforcement for
the efforts of state judicial, legislative and executive leaders to
address the problems of crime in their jurisdictions;
strongly opposes federal action which contrary to the principles of
federalism and historical experience, would have the pernicious effect of
federalizing State criminal law and procedure; and
strongly opposes provisions of the proposed legislation which would
require that the limited resources of the federal courts be expended in
the prosecution and trial of ordinary street crimes, to the exclusion of
interstate crime syndicates, corruption in public office, the vindication
of individual constitutional rights and other traditional federal issues.
AND WHEREAS, the American Judges Association by and through its
Board of Governors agrees with the position adopted by the Conference of
Chief Justices in the above resolution,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
hereby joins with the Conference of Chief Justices in support of its
Resolution IX concerning the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
of 1994 and urges the president, members of the Senate, and members of the
House of Representatives to be aware of the matters raised in this
resolution and to amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
of 1994 and urges the president, members of the Senate, and members of the
House of Representatives to be aware of the matters raised in this
resolution and to amend the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act
of 1994 in order to address the concerns addressed herein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be sent to
the President of the United States, William J. Clinton, and to Senator
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Chairman, United States Senate Committee on the
Judiciary on this the 15th day of April, 1994 at Salt Lake City, Utah.
Adopted at the Midyear Meeting April 1994 in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Hon. Leslie G. Johnson, Chair
AJA Resolutions Committee
Rupert Doan
Charles Flemming
Bertram J. Gaynor
Thomas Mali
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Mortimer Rogers
In Support of Recommendation of CCJ
Regarding the Senate Version of H.R. 3355 (particularly the provisions
related to drugs)
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association and each of its members
are vitally interested in all matters concerning the judiciary and the
dispensement of justice and whereas it has been called to the attention of
the American Judges Association and its members that the Conference of
Chief Justices as its recent midyear meeting reviewed the Senate version
of H.R. 3355 and particularly the provisions related to drugs, and whereas
the Conference of Chief Justices is composed of the highest judicial
officer in each of the 56 state, territorial, and commonwealth court
systems and the District of Columbia, and whereas the Board of Governors
of the American Judges Association has reviewed, and agrees with, the
recommendations of the Conference of Chief Justices which read as follows:
FIRST, in Title XII, we support the concept of court-enforced drug
treatment programs and urge you to add language that will provide grants
for developing, operating, operating, and evaluating these programs. As
you know, there is currently o language in Title XII about court-enforced
treatment programs even though it is titled "Drug Court
Programs." The Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of
State Court Administrators support a comprehensive approach to cases
involving substance abuse that make screening, assessment, and treatment
for substance abuse available at all stages of the adjudicatory process.
It is important that programs funded by the Bill contain these critical
elements to be effective: early screening, assessment and court-enforced
treatment at all stages of the process. We encourage you to use this
language when filling in the provisions of the Title.
SECOND, we support treatment for incarcerated substance-abusing
offenders as proposed in Title XII and Title VII. We also support the
aggressive development of intermediate sanctions and diversion programs
that include treatment for certain substance abuse offenses for all ages,
not just for young offenders.
THIRD, it is critical that new procedures be developed under this
Bill that will include the judicial branch of government as an equal
partner in the planning process for distribution of grants at the state
and local level. This will ensure that state judicial systems have the
necessary access to grant funds. The existing Bureau of Justice Assistance
procedure for distributing anti-drug abuse block formula funds to the
states is unacceptable to the state judiciaries. The Conference of Chief
Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators have requested
that this procedure be changed on more than one occasion.
FOURTH, we request that Title X, Subtitle B, specify that court
should be eligible members of the community coalitions that will be
supported by grants to address prevention and to coordinate substance
abuse services and treatment procedures. It is the position of the
Conference of Chief Justices that, as a part of the court's responsibility
for managing cases, courts must develop procedures for drawing on
resources outside the justice system. Courts participation will ensure
that all matters involving substance abuse can be effectively resolved to
the benefit of the individual offender or litigant and to the benefit of
the community as a whole, as well
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges
Association, by and through its Board of Governors does hereby endorse the
recommendations set out above of the Conference of Chief Justices, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be sent to
the President of the United States, William J. Clinton, and to Senator
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Chairman, United States Senate Committee on the
Judiciary on this the 15th day of April, 1994 at Salt Lake City, Utah.
Adopted at the 1994 Midyear Meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah, April
1994.
Hon. Leslie G. Johnson, Chair
AJA Resolutions Committee
Rupert Doan
Charles Flemming
Bertram J. Gaynor
Thomas Mali
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Mortimer Rogers
In Opposition to the
Passage of the Violent Crime Control Act
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the United States Congress is presently considering the
passage of an act entitled, "Violent Crime Control Act"; and
WHEREAS, the proposed legislation, in addition to other things,
provides that in those cases where first degree murder is allegedly
committed with a firearm which had been taken over state lines, the
Federal authorities may at their option seize jurisdiction over the matter
and try the defendant in Federal Court where the death penalty could be
imposed; and,
WHEREAS, the said Act fails to provide a budget to cover the cost
of prosecution of such cases; and
WHEREAS, the said Act would vitiate the Sovereign rights of the
states to prosecute for crimes committed within their borders; and
WHEREAS, the said Act as presently proposed would give greater
import to murder committed with a firearm as opposed to murder committed
with any other type of weapon; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of the said Act could lead to Federal
Authorities selecting only high profile cases to try in the Federal
Courts;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges
Association, does go on record in opposition to the passage of the Violent
Crime Control Act with its present provisions and strongly urges that the
Act in its present form be denied passage.
Adopted at the Annual Meeting in Seattle, Washington on August, 1991.
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
Jay Stuart Dankberg
Rupert Doan
Charles Flemming
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Mortimer Rogers
In Support of the Adoption of the
Amendment to the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 - 1989
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Conference of Chief Justices and the American Bar
Association have individually passed resolutions in support of the
proposed amendment to the Federal Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare
Act of 1980 (P.U. 96-272); and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association supports the proposed
amendment to the said Act; and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association agrees with the concept
that the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act does not presently
require states to provide preventive and reunification services on a
consistent, state-wide basis; and
WHEREAS, the Act as constituted does not require child welfare
agencies to provide detailed reports to courts and to other interested
agencies concerning preventive and reunification services available
throughout the state; and
WHEREAS, the Act does not require agencies to provide courts with
written statements describing efforts to preserve families in each
individual case; and
WHEREAS, it should be clarified that there is a private cause of
action under the Act; and
WHEREAS, it should be made clear that agencies are entitled to
federal matching funds to reimburse their costs of legal counsel in
helping them administer the Act, but on condition that agency counsel
perform certain duties needed for effective implementation of the Act; and
WHEREAS, lump sum payments should be provided to state court
systems to help them improve their administration of juvenile court cases
involving foster children; and
WHEREAS, federal matching funds should be available for the
administrative costs of citizen review boards that are not administered by
state and local child welfare agencies; and
WHEREAS, fiscal incentives should be provided to courts that reduce
or limit delays in foster care litigation and improve their court rules
governing foster care cases,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
supports the adoption of the Amendment to the Adoption Assistance and
Child Welfare Act of 1980 (P.U. 96-272) as proposed and supported by the
American Bar Association and the Conference of Chief Justices, and that a
copy of this said resolution be sent to the Congress of the United States,
the American Bar Association and the Conference of Chief Justices.
Adopted: Nashville, Tennessee October, 1989.
Submitted by: Chief Justice Thomas F. Fay
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
Jay Stuart Dankberg
Rupert Doan
Charles Flemming
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Mortimer Rogers
Urging Congress to Take No Action
Regarding the Powell Committee Report (on habeas corpus) Until It Receives
the Input of the Full Judicial Conference 1989
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, there has been adverse reaction to the Powell Committee
report on reformation of habeas corpus in capital cases; and
WHEREAS, the National Law Journal has reported that in excess of
one-half of the Chief Judges of the federal appeals system have expressed
concern as to the effect of such reformation; and
WHEREAS, changes which impinge in any way upon the writ of habeas
corpus of necessity touch upon guaranteed constitutional freedoms and
impact upon the freedom and independence of the judiciary,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
- in concert with the Chief Judges of the federal bench - urges the
Congress of the United States to take no action regarding the Powell
Committee report until the Congress receives the input of the full
Judicial Conference, and that a copy of this resolution be sent forthwide
to the members of the Senate and the House Judiciary Committees.
Adopted: Nashville, Tennessee October, 1989.
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
Jay Stuart Dankberg
Rupert Doan
Hon. Ira J. Raab
Mortimer Rogers
In Support of Guidelines for AIDS
Legislation
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association is cognizant of the
present scourge of AIDS and its and its effects upon all elements of our
society, and
WHEREAS, no group is more aware than the American Judges
Association of the civil rights of those suffering with AIDS; their right
to privacy, to fair and proper treatment and care, their right to be free
of discriminatory actions and the right they share with all citizens, the
right to die with dignity; and
WHEREAS, the Association is also properly concerned with limiting
the spread of this condition and with the protection of the members of law
enforcement and correction agencies as well as all court personnel; and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association is convinced that it is
mandatory that there be established a specific, uniform set of guidelines
pertaining to the processing of persons with AIDS;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
recommends and urges each and every individual state legislature as well
as the Congress of the United States to act immediately to pass the
necessary legislation to begin and AIDS program which specifically sets
forth and addresses the establishment of guidelines which can be employed
by the said law enforcement and correction agencies and all judicial staff
to blaze a path whereby these agencies and staff have a map to use in the
handling of situations in which AIDS is present or suspect; and further be
it resolved that a copy of this resolution be sent to both houses of every
state legislature and to the leaders of both houses of Congress, as well
as a copy to the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan.
Adopted: Kiamesha Lake, New York October, 1987.
Recommended by the Legislation Committee
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
In Support of Amendments to S. 1730
(exemption from Social Security coverage for retired federal judges on
active duty)
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association with its manifest desire
for uniformity and fairness within the judiciary wishes to do all in its
power to assure the equal treatment of both Federal and State Court
Judges; and
WHEREAS, there is presently under consideration an amendment to S.
1730 concerning Exemption from Social Security Coverage for Retired
Federal Judges Active Duty; and
WHEREAS, the American Judges Association feels it fair, equitable
and just that state judges be given equal treatment in the above regard.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
go on record as supporting an Amendment to S. 1730, whereby Sec. 7696C of
said Legislation be amended to read, "Exemption from Social Security
Coverage for retired judges on active or per diem and drawing Social
Security," and that the same modifications be included in Amendments
to both the Social Security Act and Internal Revenue Code, and that a copy
of this said resolution be sent to all members of the United States
Congress for action thereon.
Adopted: Kona, Hawaii, October 1986.
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
In Support of the Purposes Propounded by
the State Justice Institute Act of 1984
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the State Justice Institute Act of 1984 has as its
expressed and avowed purpose, "to further the development and
adoption of improved judicial administration in state courts in the United
States"; and
WHEREAS, the said expressed purpose is in accord with that which is
promulgated and held most dear by the American Judges Association; and
WHEREAS, the said American Judges Association is most cognizant of
the ever increasing burdens being placed upon the individual state court
systems; and
WHEREAS, the goal of improving the administration of justice is a
matter of national concern,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
endorse the purposes and funding of the said Act and further that copies
of this resolution be transmitted to the appropriate persons,
organizations and boards charged with the duty of effectuating the
purposes of the said Act.
Adopted: November 29, 1984 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
In Support of Funding of the State
Justice Institute
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the State Justice Institute Act introduced in the
current session of the Congress (Senate Bill S. 384, House Bill H.R. 3403)
provides federal funding assistance for state court improvements,
including funds for judicial education and other improvement programs of
organizations such as the American Judges Association, the American
Academy of Judicial Education, and the National Center for State Courts;
and
WHEREAS, the State Justice Institute to be established by such
legislation would provide federal funds for state court improvement in a
manner consistent with principles of federalism acceptable to the state
courts;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Judges Association
endorse the State Justice Institute Act and urge its passage and funding
by the Congress;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be
transmitted to the appropriate persons to effectuate its purpose.
This resolution was introduced by the American Judges Association Board
of Governors and is recommended for passage by the Resolutions Committee.
Judge John A. Mutter, Chairman
AJA Resolutions Committee
|
