This article describes and analyzes three aspects of the appropriations process of the federal judiciary: the procedures used to formulate the budget, the results of the appropriations process, and the factors that influence appropriations decisions. Statistics support the hypothesis that the lower courts' appropriations lag behind their caseload. A consideration of the appropriations process explains both why such a lag occurs and why the lag is three years in length. The judiciary's appropriations process has achieved several important goals, such as improving the financial condition of the Third Branch. But other important goals, such as giving judges control of the appropriations process, have not been achieved. tion of the appropriations process. To be sure, Congress still decides how much money to allocate for the judiciary. But the judiciary can influence that decision, primarily because officials in the Third Branch prepare the judiciary's appropriations estimates (28 U.S.C. ? 605 (1982)) and present them to Congress. This article offers a description and analysis of the appropriations pro cess of the federal judiciary1 in order to answer several questions: How is the judiciary's budget formulated? How much money has Congress ap propriated for the judiciary? What factors affect appropriations decisions? The answers to these questions deserve attention not only because the courts' funding has important implications for their ability to perform their constitutional role, but also because the appropriations process has important implications for some of the broader issues of judicial adminis tration. For example, the appropriations process has important implica *The author is indebted to Dr. Peter G. Fish for his comments on previous drafts of this article, and to Gary Myers for his assistance in computing the statistics in this article. **J.D. graduate, Duke University School of Law. 1. The term "federal judiciary," as used in this article, includes the U.S. Supreme Court (which prepares its own appropriations estimates), the Courts of Appeals, the District Courts, the special courts (such as the Court of Claims), the Bankruptcy Courts, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, and the Federal Judicial Center. THE JUSTICE SYSTEM JOURNAL, Volume 10, Number 1 (1985)
[1]
Karin Sixl-Daniell,et al.
THE BUDGET PROCESS
,
2006
.
[2]
W. Heydebrand,et al.
THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC BUREAUCRACIES: AN ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS OF FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS
,
1977
.
[3]
P. Fish.
The Politics of Federal Judicial Administration
,
1973
.
[4]
G. Hazard,,et al.
Court Finance and Unitary Budgeting
,
1972
.
[5]
Allen G. Schick,et al.
Budget Innovation in the States.
,
1972
.
[6]
H. P. Chandler.
The Administration of the Federal Courts
,
1948
.