Court Backlogs prevent ability to redress or fight injustice—damages the judicial system

The excessively politicized confirmation process is not the only or even the biggest problem the federal judiciary faces. Across the country, federal courts carry overwhelming backlogs that are de facto deferring or denying justice to thousands of people.

When federal courts can’t keep up with caseloads, parties who require a federal forum to redress wrongs, vindicate their rights, or fight an injustice as a matter of jurisdiction are harmed—sometimes profoundly. Plaintiffs and defendants alike accept compromises and sacrifices they should never have to entertain. A prime example from the civil system is arbitration. Proceedings before arbiters rather than judges and juries favor so-called “repeat players,” i.e., corporations and other deep-pocketed parties, who, accordingly, vocally advocate for arbitration as a solution to the backlog. Even when arbitration yields a just result, it does not create precedent that will help others facing the same issues in the future.