Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats, led by U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), have called on the Appropriations Committee to increase funding for federal defenders in the Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations bill. In a letter sent to committee leadership, Durbin and nine other senators asked for action to address what they describe as an ongoing shortfall affecting federal public defenders.
The letter urges that the FY26 appropriations bill for Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) include robust funding for Defender Services. The senators also request that any supplemental appropriations or continuing resolutions address current payment shortfalls impacting panel attorneys. “As you develop the Fiscal Year 2026 (FY26) appropriations bill for Financial Services and General Government (FSGG), we ask that you provide robust funding to Defender Services. We also ask that in the event of any FY25 supplemental appropriations bills or a continuing resolution permitting anomalies, you fund the current shortfall that is preventing payments to panel attorneys.”
The senators emphasized the constitutional role of federal defenders, stating: “To meet the Sixth Amendment’s mandate for those unable to afford private representation, federal defender organizations serve 92 of the 94 federal judicial districts and employ approximately 4,200 personnel to represent indigent defendants in all aspects of a federal criminal case. Federal law also provides for the compensation of more than 12,000 private defense attorneys, also called panel attorneys, who agree to represent defendants financially unable to retain counsel but, for various reasons, are not eligible for representation by a federal defender. Together, federal defenders and panel attorneys represent about 90 percent of criminal defendants in federal court. Adequate funding is critical to ensuring federal defenders and panel attorneys have the resources necessary to carry out their constitutional mandate … To provide a fair trial, much more than a lawyer is required. Often, a rigorous defense will require various professionals, such as investigators, paralegals, interpreters, experts, and other support staff; training, technology, and research services; case-related travel; and office space and supplies, among other costs. Margins for spending on case essentials are already thin. Federal defender funding largely is allocated to personnel and space, leaving less available for other case necessities.”
They pointed out that flat funding from FY24 into FY25 amounted to an effective budget cut due to inflation pressures. This resulted in program suspensions—including most in-person training—and hiring freezes within Defender Services organizations across the country. As stated: “In FY25, the Defender Services budget remained level with FY24, which effectively was a funding cut due to inflation, resulting in a shortfall. Federal defenders suspended and deferred certain programmatic needs, such as most in-person training and cybersecurity upgrades, and implemented a hiring freeze. Most alarmingly, as of July 7, 2025 funds for panel attorney payments were completely depleted; as a result payments are and will continue to be deferred until the start of the new fiscal year absent approximately $116 million in supplemental funding…Federal defender organizations across the country are understaffed…Panel attorneys…have begun to withdraw or refuse case appointments.”
The senators cited concerns raised by Judge Amy St. Eve regarding policy changes during recent administrations—such as stricter charging policies—which could increase workloads without corresponding increases in resources: “[S]everal of the Trump Administration’s new policies…‘could generate substantial new workload…’ Judge St. Eve continued…‘there is anecdotal evidence of this increased workload already.’ Most immediately courts worry that defendants may be detained longer than necessary or criminal cases may be compromised if counsel and resource shortages lead to violations of the right to a speedy trial…”
According to their letter’s conclusion: “Despite these concerns…House FSGG approved a version…that would provide $1.57 billion…$196 million below…the Administrative Office of United States Courts (AO). This remains far below…the minimum amount necessary…Unfunded panel attorney obligations from this fiscal year will immediately roll over…The AO predicts that if funded at House level federal defenders may be required downsize by 600 positions or more…and another deferment…could be necessary beginning even earlier next year…”
Besides Durbin’s signature on this latest request were Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Chris Coons (D-DE), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Adam Schiff (D-CA).
Durbin has previously led similar efforts seeking increased appropriations for Defender Services.
