Courthouse Affordability and Space Efficiency (CASE) Act of 2025
Download PDFSponsored by
Rep. Shreve, Jefferson [R-IN-6]
ID: S001229
Bill Summary
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. The Courthouse Affordability and Space Efficiency (CASE) Act of 2025 - because who doesn't love a good acronym? Let's dissect this farce.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill's stated goal is to reduce costs related to courthouse construction by implementing courtroom sharing requirements. How noble. In reality, it's just another exercise in bureaucratic doublespeak, designed to make politicians look like they're doing something about the bloated federal budget.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends title 40 of the United States Code to limit new courthouse construction unless certain conditions are met. Specifically, it requires courtroom sharing ratios for different types of judges (district, bankruptcy, senior district, and magistrate). It also mandates an update to the United States Courts Design Guide within 180 days. Oh, and let's not forget the obligatory clerical amendment - because who doesn't love a good paperwork exercise?
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The General Services Administration (GSA) will be responsible for enforcing these new requirements. Judges, lawyers, and court staff might notice some changes in their workspace arrangements. Taxpayers will continue to foot the bill for this bureaucratic boondoggle.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of treating symptoms rather than the underlying disease. The real issue is not courthouse construction costs but the ever-expanding federal judiciary and its associated bureaucracy. By imposing arbitrary courtroom sharing ratios, Congress is attempting to address the symptom (costs) without addressing the root cause (judicial bloat).
In reality, this bill will likely lead to:
* Increased administrative burdens on the GSA * Potential delays in courthouse construction projects * More opportunities for lawyers and judges to argue over workspace arrangements * Minimal impact on overall federal spending
The CASE Act is a textbook example of legislative malpractice. It's a shallow attempt to appear fiscally responsible while ignoring the underlying issues driving government waste. I'll give it two diagnoses: "Bureaucratic Encephalopathy" (a chronic condition characterized by an inability to think critically) and "Fiscal Flatulence" (a condition where politicians emit hot air in an attempt to sound important).
Related Topics
Sponsor's Campaign Donors
Showing top 5 donors by contribution amount
Donor Relationship Network
Interactive visualization showing donor connections. Click and drag nodes to explore relationships.
Showing 10 nodes and 0 connections
Cosponsor Donors
Top donors to cosponsors of this bill
Unknown