TranslatePolitics.com

Recent debates

8 latest topics

09-03 Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act of 2026 13 statements 09-03 Moment of Silence in Honor of the 25th Anniversary of September 11 2 statements 09-03 Honoring Former U.S. Representative Charles Hatcher of Georgia 2 statements 09-03 Recognizing Firefighters from California's Third Congressional District 17 statements 09-02 Saluting White Plains Beautification Foundation 2 statements 09-02 Celebrating Rural Lawyer Julie Bear 4 statements 09-02 Operation Midway Blitz Anniversary 2 statements 09-02 Catherine Watts Celebrates 100th Birthday 4 statements

House of Representatives

Local Access to Courts Act

2026-08-31 Issue 137 Showing 1–4 of 4

Official Congressional Record ↗

Derek Schmidt

Republican

“I want to change some rules about where courts can be held in Texas and California.”

Derek Schmidt

Republican

“I support this bill. It makes courts easier to access for people in Texas and California. The driving distances to courts are long now. This bill adds new court locations so people don't have to drive as far. This is good for people who need to go to court.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, local access to Federal courts is critical to ensuring the rights of the people are protected. Under current law, the Southern District of Texas is divided into seven districts. The Houston Division comprises 13 counties but is only authorized to hold court in Houston. The Southern District of California comprises two counties, and the Court is only authorized to be held in the city of San Diego. Both of these judicial districts have experienced significant population growth in recent years, and their organization means that far too many Americans have to travel long distances for their day in court. In both regions, Americans may have to travel as far as 100 miles or more just to reach the Federal courthouse. These distances place an unnecessary burden on those who need to access both the civil and criminal justice systems. I might say, Mr. Speaker, while I strongly support this legislation, 100 miles isn't very far to get to the Federal courthouse when you live in parts of my home State of Kansas. The Local Access to Courts Act would help to alleviate the burden by adding an additional place in both judicial districts where the Southern District of Texas and the Southern District of California may hold court. In the Southern District of Texas, S. 32 would add College Station to the list of places where court may be held. In the Southern District of California, this bill would add El Centro to the list of places where court may be held. S. 32 would increase accessibility to our Federal courts for victims, jurors, civil parties, counsel, and the general public by sparing them from the burden of a multihour drive just to get to the nearest Federal courthouse. S. 32 passed the Senate by unanimous consent, and I am glad to see that same bipartisan support in the House. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Jamie Raskin

Democrat

“I agree with the previous speaker. It is unfair that some people have to drive far to go to court. I want this bill to pass. It will add new courts in two districts. This is good for people who need to go to court. I say this bill will help many people. Our courts have problems. This bill is a small fix.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 32, which would amend title 28 to provide an additional place for holding court in the Southern District of Texas and in the Southern District of California. Under due process and equal protection, our basic access to justice rights don't change or shouldn't change depending on where we live. But in practice, that is exactly what is happening, as my distinguished colleague Mr. Schmidt just explained. When residents of the Southern District of Texas or the Southern District of California need to drive for hours to attend court or to go serve on a jury, which is a civic obligation, they have less access to justice than other citizens with easy and direct physical access to the court system. It makes no sense that just because someone lives in a more rural district they should incur dramatically increased travel time and administrative expenses just to seek justice. With the price of gasoline and diesel soaring today with inflation, that is no joke. Adding courthouses is a small step in the right direction toward making the courthouse doors accessible to all Americans, no matter where they live. The Southern District of Texas spans 43 counties, and the Southern District of California includes San Diego County, the second most populated county in California. Residents there have the same problem many people are experiencing across the country. To access both the physical and the metaphorical courthouse doors, they need to travel long distances and wait in the backlog before having their day in court. The easiest way to alleviate the burdens on the residents of these two growing districts is to add a courthouse. This change is cost free because there is an existing judicial facility available for the court to use in both of these places. Making use of this existing building would ensure that litigants, attorneys, witnesses, and other court users would have greater access to the justice that our Federal courts and our Constitution provide. The administrative body for the Federal court system, the Administrative Office of the Courts, supports this bill. They know, like we do, that our country cannot have a flourishing justice system when its buildings are falling apart, its staff are underpaid, and there is a perpetual shortage of judges to administer the laws. We have a lot to do to ensure Americans have equal access to our laws and a judiciary that they can trust to fairly hear them out and adjudicate their disputes. This bill won't fix all the problems, but it will help more than 13 million Americans who deserve equal access to justice and greater access where they live. I appreciate Representatives McCaul, Ruiz, and Issa for their bipartisan work on this issue. I want to recognize Mr. Schmidt for his distinguished stewardship of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this commonsense legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Derek Schmidt

Republican 5:00 p.m.

“I like this bill. It will help people go to court in two places. I want it to pass. Other people should vote yes too.”

What they said. What they meant.

Recent debates