CROWDED COURTS

El Paso Needs At Least 2 More Federal Judges

El Paso's case for more federal judges, prosecutors, court-rooms and
overall funding is so obvious that to ignore it is a gross injustice,
especially when the onslaught of cases is brought on by changes in federal law.

Since 1994, the number of federal criminal cases -- especially drug and
illegal immigrant cases -- has more than quadrupled in El Paso County,
increasing from 379 to 1,962. The increase is fueled, in part, by changes
in immigration laws implemented after 1996.

The El Paso division of the federal Western District of Texas has one of
the highest caseloads in the nation, yet it's forced to deal with that
caseload without adequate personnel and funding. This is not acceptable.

And it may take more dramatic actions, such as the district attorney's
refusal to prosecute federal cases without promise of remuneration, to send
a strong message to the feds that unfunded mandates don't come without a price.

Without question, statistics bear out that El Paso needs at least two more
federal judges. The district has only two federal district judges and three
magistrate judges. "Our workload is 10 to 20 times that of the rest of the
nation," said chief U.S. District Judge Harry Lee Hudspeth.

The number of assistant U.S. attorneys who handle criminal cases also is
lower than it should be. The El Paso division has 23 of these attorneys and
handled 1,802 cases in 1999, while San Antonio has 22 such attorneys who
handled only 416 cases.

Such disparities are blatantly unfair, because they have hit U.S.-Mexico
border areas the hardest. And because of El Paso's position on the border
and proximity to an even larger Mexican city, its court systems are being
virtually overwhelmed with cases.

What makes these increases so burdensome for border cities is that most had
inadequate court infrastructure before the criminal cases began increasing.
These federal cases should not be paid for with county tax funds but with
federal money. That's a point that District Attorney Jaime Esparza, and
other prosecutors in border counties, had to drive home with desperate
measures such as refusing to prosecute federal cases that the DA's office
had been handling without federal recompense.

A small point of optimism in this battle for federal attention and funding
is that U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, obtained a $12 million
emergency appropriation, to be shared by border states. The Justice
Department had illogically delayed allocation of that money to counties
because it wouldn't allow funds to be spent on detention costs for federal
prisoners.

Considering that detention costs account for 75 percent of the expense of
most of the criminal or immigration cases, it was another unfair move that
penalized border communities with unfunded mandates. However, this time,
Hutchison's provision mandates that detention costs be reimbursed.

President Clinton has indicated his support for the measure, and he should
sign it. However, this is only stopgap funding. If federal laws are to be
properly implemented along the U.S.-Mexico border, the communities bearing
the expenses of law enforcement must be adequately reimbursed for these costs.