Newsom's Proposed Courts Budget Includes Millions for New Judges, Courthouses
The proposal includes $100 million in "equity funding" aimed at equalizing how revenues are divided among California's 58 trial courts.
January 10, 2022 at 04:59 PM
3 minute read
State and Local GovernmentAs tax revenues flood state coffers, Gov. Gavin Newsom has proposed a record-high $5.2 billion budget for California's judicial branch, with plans for hundreds of millions of additional dollars for new judgeships and courthouses.
Newsom's 2022-23 spending proposal, unveiled at a press event Monday in Sacramento, includes almost $891 million in new funding for the judiciary, much of it directed toward the state's 58 trial courts. The increased spending includes:
- Nearly $43 million for 23 new trial court judgeships. The 23 bench officer positions are what's left of the 50 judgeships originally created but not fully funded by the Legislature in 2007. The judicial positions will be allocated by a needs study, with many of the posts going to courts in the Inland Empire and Central Valley.
- $100 million to promote "fiscal equity" among superior courts. The Judicial Council will decide how the money is divvied up. The issue of how to equalize funding among courts is a divisive one, with judges arguing over whether case filings, case types, population growth and other factors are the proper measures to consider. Ongoing differences in funding stems, in some cases, from the years when counties set spending levels for courts.
- $263 million for early work on five new courthouses as well as additional funding for previously approved projects. The new court buildings are located in Santa Clarita, Fairfield, Fresno, San Luis Obispo and Quincy in Plumas County. Money for courthouses already in the works will go to projects in Ukiah, Butte County and San Bernardino County.
- More than $33 million in the next fiscal year to support remote proceedings in courtrooms. The money "will be used to provide a publicly accessible audio stream for every courthouse in the state," the governor's budget proposal said. The California Supreme Court in December declined to force the Los Angeles County Superior Court to restore a program that allowed the public to listen to proceedings via a remote connection.
Newsom's proposal also includes new funding for court technology projects, appellate appointed counsel, higher salary and benefit costs for judges, court and branch employees and court data collection.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDOJ, 10 State AGs File Amended Antitrust Complaint Against RealPage and Big Landlords
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250