Pubdate: Thu, 21 Dec 2000
Source: El Paso Times (TX)
Copyright: 2000 El Paso Times
Contact:  P.O.Box 20, El Paso, Texas 79999
Fax: (915) 546-6415
Website:  http://www.borderlandnews.com/

CROWDED COURTS

El Paso Needs At Least 2 More Federal Judges

El Paso's case for more federal judges, prosecutors, court-rooms and 
overall funding is so obvious that to ignore it is a gross injustice, 
especially when the onslaught of cases is brought on by changes in federal law.

Since 1994, the number of federal criminal cases -- especially drug and 
illegal immigrant cases -- has more than quadrupled in El Paso County, 
increasing from 379 to 1,962. The increase is fueled, in part, by changes 
in immigration laws implemented after 1996.

The El Paso division of the federal Western District of Texas has one of 
the highest caseloads in the nation, yet it's forced to deal with that 
caseload without adequate personnel and funding. This is not acceptable.

And it may take more dramatic actions, such as the district attorney's 
refusal to prosecute federal cases without promise of remuneration, to send 
a strong message to the feds that unfunded mandates don't come without a price.

Without question, statistics bear out that El Paso needs at least two more 
federal judges. The district has only two federal district judges and three 
magistrate judges. "Our workload is 10 to 20 times that of the rest of the 
nation," said chief U.S. District Judge Harry Lee Hudspeth.

The number of assistant U.S. attorneys who handle criminal cases also is 
lower than it should be. The El Paso division has 23 of these attorneys and 
handled 1,802 cases in 1999, while San Antonio has 22 such attorneys who 
handled only 416 cases.

Such disparities are blatantly unfair, because they have hit U.S.-Mexico 
border areas the hardest. And because of El Paso's position on the border 
and proximity to an even larger Mexican city, its court systems are being 
virtually overwhelmed with cases.

What makes these increases so burdensome for border cities is that most had 
inadequate court infrastructure before the criminal cases began increasing. 
These federal cases should not be paid for with county tax funds but with 
federal money. That's a point that District Attorney Jaime Esparza, and 
other prosecutors in border counties, had to drive home with desperate 
measures such as refusing to prosecute federal cases that the DA's office 
had been handling without federal recompense.

A small point of optimism in this battle for federal attention and funding 
is that U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, obtained a $12 million 
emergency appropriation, to be shared by border states. The Justice 
Department had illogically delayed allocation of that money to counties 
because it wouldn't allow funds to be spent on detention costs for federal 
prisoners.

Considering that detention costs account for 75 percent of the expense of 
most of the criminal or immigration cases, it was another unfair move that 
penalized border communities with unfunded mandates. However, this time, 
Hutchison's provision mandates that detention costs be reimbursed.

President Clinton has indicated his support for the measure, and he should 
sign it. However, this is only stopgap funding. If federal laws are to be 
properly implemented along the U.S.-Mexico border, the communities bearing 
the expenses of law enforcement must be adequately reimbursed for these costs.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Terry F