As we approach April 1, many advocates have made their case about budget items that should be included in the budget for fiscal year 2014-15. Sadly, too few voices in support of the Judiciary budget, as submitted by Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, have been heard. Perhaps that is because the public assumes that the Judiciary will be given the funds it needs to provide the justice we all assume is our constitutional right. But that is not the case.
Over the past five years, the Judiciary has kept its budget virtually flat by cutting programs such as children's centers and community-based mediation programs; reducing the non-judicial workforce by more than 1,900 through an early retirement program, targeted layoffs and a hiring freeze; making optimal use of limited resources; and improving use of time- and cost-saving technology.
This year, the Judiciary submitted a budget that calls for a mere 2.5 percent increase. It has been suggested that this small increase is "out of step" with the goal of keeping increases at or below 2 percent.
Let's be clear: The Judiciary is a separate and equal branch of government and the chief judge believes he needs approval of the budget as submitted to fulfill the constitutional mandate of the courts.
The budget as submitted by the Judiciary must be approved so the courts can provide full, fair and timely adjudication to the people of this state as guaranteed by the Constitution. The Judiciary's budget request offers an appropriate balance between the needs of the public and available fiscal resources.
The "bare bones" Judiciary budgets of the past five years have had an enormous negative impact on the courts. The damage has been especially severe in Family Court where, for example, because of crushing caseloads, children remain in foster care far too long because their cases are not resolved in a timely fashion in court. Our children languish in foster care far longer than 50 out of 52 other jurisdictions. We should be ashamed.
Delays in Family Court have a terrible impact as well on victims of domestic violence, whose safety is at risk because they cannot get protective orders in a timely fashion. Similarly, desperate families are unable to afford the basic necessities of life because they cannot secure needed child support orders because their cases are back-logged on overloaded court calendars.
As a result, Modern Courts supports the inclusion of $5 million in the budget for 20 additional Family Court judges. In addition, we support the $15 million request for civil legal services for the poor. Within a fiscally sound policy, serving the public should be our foremost concern and we all must answer the question of how we can best provide justice for those who are facing a loss of the essentials of life. The poorest citizens, who at times of economic stress have the greatest needs, must rely on continued access to critical services through the courts. This is a matter of simple justice.
Further erosion of the court system's resources will be detrimental to the health of our state. The doors of court houses throughout the state have already been shut one half hour earlier as a result of budget restrictions. Failure to enact the proposed Judiciary budget can lead to the further closing of courts because of a lack of personnel and other resources.
Underfunding the Judiciary will have dire consequences that reach far beyond the courthouse. It threatens to unravel the very fabric of the rule of law.