2026-09-26T06:00:22-04:00 / 福克斯新闻
参议员克里斯·孔斯与阿什利·穆迪称：居住要求限制合格司法任命人选
作者：罗伯特·施马德 福克斯新闻
发布于 2026年9月26日 美国东部时间早上6:00
法律专家热议“为核心华盛顿法院‘去沼泽化’”的努力
卡托研究所与传统基金会的学者对两党改革两家核心法院的努力表示赞赏。
NEW 您现在可以收听福克斯新闻的文章！
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/dde0f6a6-62b8-4bd0-b8ab-2bede12bd8b7
收听本文
4 分钟
一个两党参议员团队正在提出一项立法，他们表示该法案将扩大可在两家拥有全国管辖权的权倾联邦法院任职的合格法官人选范围。
特拉华州民主党参议员克里斯·孔斯与佛罗里达州共和党参议员阿什利·穆迪于周二提出一项法案，将取消联邦索赔法院与联邦巡回法院的法官必须居住在华盛顿特区50英里范围内的要求。
两家法院均拥有全国管辖权，尽管其专属审理范围有所不同。联邦索赔法院主要处理针对联邦政府的索赔案件，而联邦巡回法院则审理涉及专利、商标、政府合同及其他领域的上诉案件。
例如，两家法院中的任何一家作出的裁决，都可能影响孔斯所在特拉华州或穆迪所在佛罗里达州的选民。索赔法院审理寻求从联邦政府获得金钱或其他救济的实体的诉讼，而作为最高法院大法官“人才输送管道”的联邦巡回法院，则会审查下级法院与联邦政府相关的裁决以及行政机构的决定。
迈克·戴维斯：联邦法院针对99岁高龄法官作出危险先例判决
2025年10月21日，佛罗里达州共和党参议员阿什利·穆迪在国会山投票后离开参议院会场（比尔·克拉克/CQ-滚呼公司 via 盖蒂图片社）
“美国人理应获得最优秀、最合格的法官，尤其是在知识产权法这类专业知识对理解复杂案件、公平裁决众多企业家企业未来至关重要的领域，”孔斯在谈及该法案时表示。“长期以来，我们将能够承担最棘手的知识产权与联邦合同案件的法官人选，限制在愿意举家搬迁至华盛顿特区的人群范围内。这种情况不会再继续了。这项两党法案确保拥有全国管辖权的法院能够从全国人才库中选拔法官。”
接受福克斯新闻数字频道采访的法律学者对参议员们的提议表示认可。
“通常很难招募到全国各地的顶尖人才搬到哥伦比亚特区担任这些法官职务，”传统基金会高级法律研究员扎克·史密斯告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，他指出位于纽约市的国际贸易法院也拥有类似广泛的地理管辖权，但并未对法官设置居住要求。
“许多其他上诉巡回法院覆盖多个州，这些法院的法官往往会在其管辖的各州开展工作，随后齐聚特定地点开会并听取口头辩论。这种地理分散的安排并非罕见。”
倾向自由主义的卡托研究所宪法研究中心主任托马斯·贝里基本表示赞同。
“前所未闻”：法官揭露特朗普移民案件幕后协调
2025年10月，特拉华州民主党参议员克里斯·孔斯离开华盛顿国会大厦（福克斯新闻数字频道）
“这些法院的管辖权基于所涉案件类型，因此，如果这意味着法官不仅可以在其他地方居住，甚至可以在其他地点听取口头辩论，那么对于某些案件而言可能会更加便利——比如说，案件当事人身处美国另一端，”贝里告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。
批评人士可能会辩称，拟议的立法可能会要求法官频繁往返华盛顿特区，从而增加纳税人的旅行成本。法律专家也可能认为，法官定期面对面会面的能力可能会削弱司法同僚间的协作。
法官席上的法槌（iStock图片）
贝里指出，一些研究显示，在新冠疫情期间，由于法官们当面共处的时间减少，法院判决中的异议意见有所减少，但他也打消了人们的顾虑，表示“所有其他地区上诉法院已经基本按照这种模式运作了100多年，显然这并未妨碍它们履行本职工作。”
最高法院首席大法官点明美国人对他与同事们的误解
两位专家均认为，实施这项提议不会在旅行成本方面构成问题。
“对于一家管辖范围覆盖全美全境的法院而言，我们应该基于优绩——而非他们与华盛顿特区‘泡沫’的远近——从美国各地提名法官，”曾担任佛罗里达巡回法官与联邦检察官的穆迪在谈及该法案时表示。“我的‘更优法官席位法案’取消了一项过时的居住要求，以扩大有资格任职的美国人群体，并让我们的法院能够更全面地反映整个国家的面貌。”
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用程序
福克斯新闻数字频道周四联系孔斯与穆迪的办公室置评，但未获得回应。
Two powerful federal courts face push to break free from DC bubble as unlikely duo steps in
2026-09-26T06:00:22-04:00 / Fox News
Sens. Chris Coons and Ashley Moody say the residency requirement limits the pool of qualified judicial appointments
By Robert Schmad Fox News
Published September 26, 2026 6:00am EDT
Legal experts discuss effort to ‘de-swamp’ key DC courts
Scholars from the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation praised a bipartisan effort to reform two key courts.
NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!
blob:https://www.foxnews.com/dde0f6a6-62b8-4bd0-b8ab-2bede12bd8b7
Listen to this article
4 min
A bipartisan team of senators is proposing legislation that they say will broaden the pool of qualified judges available to serve on two powerful federal courts with nationwide jurisdiction.
Sens. Chris Coons, D-Delaware, and Ashley Moody, R-Florida, introduced a bill on Tuesday that would remove the requirement that judges sitting on the Court of Federal Claims and the Federal Circuit live within 50 miles of Washington, D.C.
Both courts have nationwide jurisdiction, though their specialized dockets differ. The Court of Federal Claims primarily handles claims against the federal government, while the Federal Circuit hears appeals involving patents, trademarks, government contracts and other areas.
A decision from either court, for example, could affect Coons’ constituents in Delaware or Moody’s in Florida. The claims court hears arguments from entities seeking money or other relief from the federal government whereas the circuit court, which is a feeder for Supreme Court justices, reviews decisions from lower courts and agencies in relation to the federal government.
MIKE DAVIS: FEDERAL COURT SETS DANGEROUS PRECEDENT AGAINST 99-YEAR-OLD JUDGE
Sen. Ashley Moody, R-Fla., leaves the Senate floor after a vote in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, October 21, 2025(Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
“Americans deserve the best, most qualified judges, especially in areas like intellectual property law where expertise is key to understanding complex cases and fairly deciding the future of many entrepreneurs’ businesses,” Coons said of the legislation. “For too long, we have limited the pool of judges available to take on the toughest IP and federal contract cases to those willing to uproot their lives and move to Washington, D.C. No longer. This bipartisan bill ensures that courts of national jurisdiction can draw from a pool of national talent.”
Legal scholars who spoke with Fox News Digital saw merit in the senators’ proposal.
“It’s often difficult to recruit top-level talent from across the country to relocate to the District of Columbia for these judgeships,” Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Zach Smith told Fox News Digital, noting that the Court of International Trade in New York City has a similarly broad geographic jurisdiction and lacks a residency requirement for judges.
“Many other circuit courts of appeal cover multiple states and often the judges on those courts sit throughout the states that that court covers and then they often come together to meet and hear cases and hear oral arguments in a specific location. This type of geographic dispersal it’s not an unusual arrangement.”
Thomas Berry, the director of the libertarian-aligned Cato Institute’s Center for Constitutional Studies largely agreed.
‘UNPRECEDENTED’: JUDGES REVEAL BEHIND-THE-SCENES COORDINATION ON TRUMP IMMIGRATION CASES
Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., makes his way out of the Capitol building in Washington, October 2025.(Fox News Digital)
“These courts have jurisdiction based on the issue involved, so potentially if this meant that the judges were able not just to live elsewhere, but even hear oral arguments elsewhere, that could potentially be more convenient for some types of cases if they’re, say, involved parties on the opposite side of the country,” Berry told Fox News Digital.
Critics may argue that the proposed legislation could increase travel costs to taxpayers by requiring frequent travel for judges to and from D.C. Legal experts may also feel that the ability of judges to regularly meet face to face could lead to a loss of judicial collegiality.
A gavel sits on a judge’s bench as people leave court.(iStock)
Berry noted that some studies show that, during the Coronavirus pandemic, court decisions saw less dissents as judges spent less time in person with one another, but qualified possible concerns by stating that “all of the other regional courts of appeals have been basically working under such a system for over 100 years, and clearly it hasn’t gotten in the way from them doing the work that they’re meant to do.”
SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE PINPOINTS WHAT AMERICANS MISUNDERSTAND ABOUT HIM AND HIS COLLEAGUES
Neither expert felt that travel costs would be an issue in implementing this proposal.
“For a court that covers the entire country, we should be considering nominating judges from everywhere in America based on merit — not their proximity to the D.C. bubble,” Moody, herself a former Florida circuit judge and federal prosecutor, said of the legislation. “My Better Bench Act removes an outdated residency requirement to expand the pool of qualified Americans who can serve and allows our courts to be a better reflection of the nation as a whole.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The offices of Coons and Moody did not respond to requests for comment when reached by Fox News Digital on Thursday.