Expediting Cases and Setting Deadlines for Court Actions

Expediting Cases and Setting Deadlines for Court Actions

April 4, 2024
Expediting Cases and Setting Deadlines for Court Actions
Federal court litigation is subject to various deadlines.
• 16 U.S.C. § 6516 governs judicial review of certain
Often, statutes or procedural rules set time limits for actions
hazardous fuel reduction projects on federal lands. It
by the litigants. For instance, statutes of limitations require
does not require but rather “encourages a court of
cases to be filed within a certain time after the conduct at
competent jurisdiction to expedite, to the maximum
issue. Once a case is filed, generally applicable court rules
extent practicable, the proceedings in the action with the
and case-by-case scheduling decisions may set deadlines
goal of rendering a final determination on jurisdiction,
for the parties to file motions and briefs and argue the case.
and (if jurisdiction exists) a final determination on the
merits, as soon as practicable after the date on which a
Less commonly, statutes may require prompt action by
complaint or appeal is filed to initiate the action.”
courts themselves. Some such statutes require courts to
expedite proceedings without setting exact time limits for
• 18 U.S.C. § 3509(j) seeks to “minimize the length of
action. Others impose specific deadlines by which courts
time [a] child must endure the stress of involvement
must take certain actions. This In Focus provides an
with the criminal process.” It provides that, when a child
overview and examples of both types of statutes, then
is called to give testimony in a criminal case, “on
discusses selected considerations for Congress related to
motion by the attorney for the Government or a guardian
setting deadlines for court actions.
ad litem, or on its own motion, the court may designate
the case as being of special public importance,” and then
Expediting Proceedings
“expedite the proceeding and ensure that it takes
Expediting a court proceeding means that the court handles
precedence over any other.”
the matter more quickly than ordinary procedures would
provide, including giving the matter priority over matters
• 42 U.S.C. § 2000a-5(b) provides that, upon receipt of a
that are not expedited.
request from the Attorney General for certain civil rights
cases to be heard by a three-judge panel, “it shall be the
28 U.S.C. § 1657(a), a provision within the title of the U.S.
duty of the chief judge of the circuit or the presiding
Code that governs courts and court procedures, generally
circuit judge ... to designate immediately three judges in
gives courts discretion to determine the order in which civil
such circuit ... to hear and determine such case, and it
cases should be considered. It requires expedition of
shall be the duty of the judges so designated to assign
petitions for writs of habeas corpus under chapter 153 of
the case for hearing at the earliest practicable date ... and
Title 28, proceedings to confine a recalcitrant witness under
to cause the case to be in every way expedited.”
28 U.S.C. § 1826, claims for temporary or preliminary
injunctive relief, or “or any other action if good cause
• 52 U.S.C. § 10701 governs Attorney General suits to
therefor is shown.”
enforce the Twenty-Sixth Amendment and provides in
part: “It shall be the duty of the judges designated to
Multiple other federal statutes provide for courts to expedite
hear the case ... to cause the case to be in every way
certain matters without setting specific deadlines. Congress
expedited.”
can require courts to expedite certain matters, can set
standards for deciding whether to expedite, or can
Setting Time Limits for Court Actions
encourage courts to resolve certain disputes quickly.
Other federal statutes set specific deadlines by which courts
Examples include the following:
must take certain actions. One example is the Speedy Trial
Act, which seeks to ensure that criminal defendants are
• 2 U.S.C. § 1412(b) provides, in appeals in cases
brought to trial promptly as required by the Sixth
involving the constitutionality of the Congressional
Amendment. One provision of the act states:
Accountability Act: “The Supreme Court shall, if it has
not previously ruled on the question, accept jurisdiction
In any case in which a plea of not guilty is entered,
over the appeal ... , advance the appeal on the docket,
the trial of a defendant charged in an information or
and expedite the appeal to the greatest extent possible.”
indictment with the commission of an offense shall
commence within seventy days from the filing date
• 8 U.S.C. § 1252(e)(3)(D) requires federal courts at all
(and making public) of the information or
levels “to advance on the docket and to expedite to the
indictment, or from the date the defendant has
greatest possible extent the disposition of any case
appeared before a judicial officer of the court in
considered under this paragraph” involving orders of
which such charge is pending, whichever date last
removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b).
occurs.
Certain periods of delay are excluded from the calculation
of time elapsed, but unexcluded delays by both prosecutors
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Expediting Cases and Setting Deadlines for Court Actions
and courts can cause violations of the act. If a defendant is
courts to act promptly, including generally requiring
not brought to trial within the applicable time limit, the act
expedition and setting specific time limits. These
provides that the “information or indictment shall be
mechanisms are part of Congress’s significant legal
dismissed on motion of the defendant.”
authority to legislate to set procedures for the federal courts.
However, legislation that governs the timing of court
Other examples of federal statutes that set deadlines for
proceedings may raise various legal and practical
specific court actions include the following:
challenges.
• 12 U.S.C. § 5390(j) provides that appeals in certain
In evaluating legislation that sets specific deadlines for
cases brought by the Federal Deposit Insurance
court proceedings, legislators may consider whether it is
Corporation shall be heard within 120 days and “shall be
feasible—or desirable—for courts and parties to meet the
decided not later than 180 days after the date of the
deadlines. Litigation can be time-consuming. The parties
notice of appeal.” It also requires the court to expedite
may need to gather evidence, file various motions, brief the
the consideration of such cases. The statute allows the
legal issues presented, and prepare for witness testimony or
court to modify the schedule and time limitations on a
oral argument. Courts may need time to schedule and hear
case-by-case basis, “based on a specific finding that the
cases and to decide them after they are presented. Statistics
ends of justice that would be served by making such a
from the U.S. district courts indicate that, in the 12-month
modification would outweigh the best interest of the
period ending in December 2023, federal felony cases took
public in having the case resolved expeditiously.”
a median of 11 months from filing to disposition. Civil
cases took a median of 6.9 months, but civil cases that went
• 18 U.S.C. § 2339B(f)(5)(B), which governs criminal
to trial took a median of 35.6 months from filing to trial.
charges of providing material support to terrorism,
provides, “If an appeal is taken during trial, the trial
Courts and litigants have some ability to speed up litigation
court shall adjourn the trial until the appeal is resolved,
timelines, but short time limits may not be possible to meet
and the court of appeals ... shall hear argument on such
or may limit the parties’ ability to present a case properly or
appeal not later than 4 days after the adjournment of the
the court’s opportunity to consider it fully. The Speedy
trial, excluding intermediate weekends and holidays;
Trial Act accounts for this consideration by setting a
[and] shall render its decision not later than 4 days after
minimum time before trial as well as a maximum to avoid
argument on appeal, excluding intermediate weekends
rushing cases to trial before the defense can fully prepare.
and holidays[.]”
Other statutes set deadlines but give courts discretion to
extend the limits in the interest of justice.
• 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(D) governs second or successive
applications for a writ of habeas corpus and provides,
Another consideration for Congress when setting deadlines
“The court of appeals shall grant or deny the
for court action is what happens if the court does not meet a
authorization to file a second or successive application
deadline. Most of the statutes listed above do not impose
not later than 30 days after the filing of the motion.”
specific consequences if a deadline is not met. The
exception is the Speedy Trial Act, which allows the
• 28 U.S.C. § 2266(c) governs habeas petitions in capital
defendant to move for dismissal if a criminal trial is
cases. It provides, “A court of appeals shall hear and
improperly delayed. By contrast, 28 U.S.C. § 2266(c)
render a final determination of any appeal of an order
enumerates certain forms of relief that are not available if a
granting or denying, in whole or in part, an application
court fails to meet a deadline.
brought under this chapter in a capital case not later than
120 days after the date on which the reply brief is filed,
More generally, when deciding whether to require courts to
or if no reply brief is filed, not later than 120 days after
expedite certain matters, Congress may consider the
the date on which the answering brief is filed.”
practical effects of expedition for courts and litigants. For
However, Section 2266(c)(4) provides that the “failure
instance, expediting some cases may require courts to
of a court to meet or comply with a time limitation
deprioritize others, causing delay for litigants whose cases
under this section shall not be a ground for granting
are not expedited. On one hand, legislation requiring
relief from a judgment of conviction or sentence.”
expedition leaves courts more discretion to set schedules
than legislation imposing specific deadlines for court
• 29 U.S.C. § 3247(a)(2) applies to petitions for review of
action. On the other hand, it may burden parties and counsel
certain decisions of the Secretary of Labor related to
who must prepare for litigation on a condensed timeline, as
awards of financial assistance, providing, “Petitions
well as judges and other court staff who handle expedited
filed under this subsection shall be heard expeditiously,
matters.
if possible within 10 days after the date of filing of a
reply to the petition.”
Joanna R. Lampe, Legislative Attorney
Considerations for Congress
IF12624
As the non-exhaustive lists of examples above show,
Congress has different ways that it may choose to direct

https://crsreports.congress.gov

Expediting Cases and Setting Deadlines for Court Actions

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12624 · VERSION 1 · NEW