The "District of Columbia Federal Judicial Officials Residency Equality Act of 2025" modifies residency requirements for federal judicial officials, generally requiring them to reside in their appointed district or state, with some exceptions for New York. These changes apply to individuals appointed after the law is enacted.
Eleanor Norton
Representative
DC
The "District of Columbia Federal Judicial Officials Residency Equality Act of 2025" modifies residency requirements for federal judicial officials in the District of Columbia. It mandates that circuit and district judges reside in the state or district they serve, and U.S. Attorneys and Marshals reside in their appointed district, with exceptions for those in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. These changes apply to individuals appointed after the Act's enactment.
D.C. Judicial Residency Rules Tightened: New Law Impacts Future Federal Appointments
The "District of Columbia Federal Judicial Officials Residency Equality Act of 2025" reshapes where federal judicial officials in D.C. and New York can live, specifically affecting future appointees. It removes a previous exception for D.C., meaning circuit judges, district judges, and clerks now must reside in the state or district they serve. The bill also tweaks rules for U.S. Attorneys and Marshals, especially in New York's Southern and Eastern Districts.
New Turf, New Rules
This Act directly changes where judicial officials are required to live. Here's the breakdown:
- Circuit Judges: Previously, D.C. had an exception. Now, under SEC. 2, all circuit judges must reside in the state they're appointed for.
- District Judges: Similar to circuit judges, the D.C. exception is gone (SEC. 2). However, district judges for the Southern District of New York get a bit of leeway – they can live outside the district.
- U.S. Attorneys: These folks now have to live in the district they serve (SEC. 2). The exception? Those in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York can live within 20 miles of the district.
- U.S. Marshals: The U.S. Marshal for the Southern District of New York also gets that 20-mile radius (SEC. 2).
- Clerks: The D.C. exception for residency is removed (SEC. 2).
These changes only apply to people appointed after this Act becomes law.
Real-World Ripple Effects
Imagine a newly appointed federal judge in D.C. Before this Act, they could live in, say, a nearby Virginia suburb. Now, they'd have to find a place within D.C. proper. This could impact everything from their commute to their kids' schools. Similarly, a U.S. Attorney in Brooklyn (part of the Eastern District of New York) could live up to 20 miles outside the district, offering some flexibility.
The Accountability Angle vs. The Talent Pool
On one hand, requiring officials to live where they work could mean they're more connected to the community and its issues. Think of it like a local business owner – they're likely more in tune with neighborhood concerns than someone who lives an hour away.
However, there's a potential downside. By limiting where these officials can live, you're also potentially shrinking the pool of qualified candidates. Someone perfect for the job might not be willing, or able, to relocate. This could be especially tricky in D.C., where housing costs are notoriously high.
Fits and Starts with Existing Laws
This new law essentially aligns D.C.'s residency requirements for circuit judges and clerks with those of other states. It levels the playing field, so to speak. For U.S. Attorneys and Marshals, particularly in New York, it creates specific, somewhat more flexible, boundaries. It's a mix of standardization and tailored adjustments.
One potential challenge? Finding – and affording – housing within D.C. for newly appointed officials. Another is the risk of a smaller, potentially less diverse, applicant pool for these key positions.