The Judicial Conference is holding its semiannual meeting in Washington on Tuesday. It will once again be followed by a press conference led by Sixth Circuit Chief Judge Jeff Sutton, and below are some topics we hope are covered during the Q&A portion.

Workplace conduct:
A week ago, NPR released the results of a comprehensive investigation into workplace misconduct in the judiciary. The findings were alarming: over the past year, NPR staff heard stories about sexual harassment, bullying or other hostile treatment by two dozen judges — several appointed by Republicans and several appointed by Democrats (only four were referenced directly due to confidentiality/retaliation concerns). Many are still serving on the bench.

This report underscores a dire situation, as last summer, studies by GAO and FJC-NAPA showed myriad deficiencies in the judiciary’s workplace conduct policies, from a lack of consistency in the internal complaints process (GAO) to the inherent conflicts of having complaint reviewers come from inside the court where the misconduct took place (FJC-NAPA).

Our questions are:
1. To what extent are the recommendations of the two above-referenced reports (GAO, p. 45; FJC-NAPA, p. 88) being implemented?
2. Are the results of the climate survey the judiciary conducted in 2023 finally ready for public release, as was promised at a JCUS meeting two years ago?
3. Given all we know about the workplace conduct issues in the judiciary, would you want your children clerking or otherwise serving in an in-chambers position?

Judicial security:
1. What concrete steps has the judiciary taken of late to improve safety for judges? Has it, for example, increased the frequency of security training for judges, pushed more home-security installations or scrubbed a significant amount of judges’ home addresses from the Internet?
2. How many judges now have 24/7 security, and have any judges who’ve requested 24/7 security been turned down?
3. In light of an increase in threats to judges, the diminishing morale of federal workers and a federal hiring freeze, do you believe the U.S. Marshals Service has in its employ enough deputy Marshals to successfully carry out its mission of protecting judges from harm? If not, what’s being done to fill these critical positions?

Judicial power:
1. Has the judiciary formulated a plan for how it plans to enforce orders that the Trump administration is clearly in violation of?
2. Has the Conference been in touch with the U.S. Marshals Service, probation officers, local police or other law enforcement officials to carry out such a plan?

Funding:
1. Given the likelihood of a government shutdown, does the judiciary plan to use PACER revenue, filing fees, pro hac vice fees from the 110 or so Trump-related lawsuits or something else to pay for court operations? (Note: it’s probably something else since most of the above categories are spoken for, but I wouldn’t put it past the third branch to come up with one neat trick to find money to stay in operation.)
2. Has the judiciary been visited by DOGE this year, and if so, have courthouse closures or contract renegotiations been on the agenda?

Judgeships:
The House Judiciary Committee passed the JUDGES Act of 2025 last week along party lines, though the measure does not appear to have 60 votes in the Senate. House Democrats want the new judgeships to start in 2029. Has the judiciary made any effort to work with the parties on a compromise — say, a judgeships bill that begins in 2027 and includes other concessions? If not, why not?

Financial disclosure:
It’s been almost seven months since the judiciary was required under the Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act to post all federal judges’ financial disclosure reports in its public database, yet some 350 reports from 2023 are still missing. What steps is the AO going to take to speed up compliance?