In a letter to leaders of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the Senators admonish the proposed steep funding shortfall for Defender Services by the House, which would result in 600+ layoffs
SPRINGFIELD – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, today led nine Senators in a letter to Appropriations Committee leadership urging robust funding for federal defenders in the FY26 appropriations bill.
As outlined in the letter, the Senators urge the Committee to mitigate the continued funding shortfall for federal public defenders, including filling the significant funding gap as proposed and approved by the House Appropriations Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) Subcommittee on July 21, 2025.
The Senators began with their request, writing: “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 then invoked federal defenders’ roles in upholding the Sixth Amendment’s bedrock guarantee of counsel in criminal proceedings, writing: “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.”
The Senators then highlighted the troubling trajectory of Defender Services funding, writing: “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. This lack of funding already is impacting the fair and efficient functioning of the criminal justice system. Federal defender organizations across the country are understaffed and face burnout among overworked employees. Panel attorneys, effectively asked in the interim to work for free and fund case expenses, have begun to withdraw or refuse case appointments.”
The Senators then explained the impact of the Trump Administration’s recent shifts in law enforcement priorities on this funding, a view shared by federal judge and Judicial Conference Committee Budget Chair Amy St. Eve, writing: “[S]everal of the Trump Administration’s new policies, such as instructing prosecutors to always charge the most serious offense and lifting the federal death penalty moratorium, ‘could generate substantial new workload and caseload for the courts and federal defender organizations.’ 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. And there will be additional consequences as cases stall: slowed proceedings and delayed justice, backlogs on court dockets and in U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, increased filings bringing challenges based on delay, and erosion of public trust in a fair and efficient criminal justice system. Underfunding Defender Services will not yield savings to the federal government.”
The Senators concluded with a plea to adequately fund Defender Services, writing: “Despite these concerns, on July 21, 2025, House FSGG approved a version of the appropriations bill that would provide $1.57 billion to Defender Services, $196 million below the FY26 request from the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AO). This remains far below the minimum amount necessary for the Defender Services program to ensure its constitutional mandate is met. Unfunded panel attorney obligations from this fiscal year will immediately roll over to FY26—a cost driven by the Criminal Justice Act over which the Judiciary has no control. And among other operational costs, the workload of Defender Services is expected to increase, necessitating greater federal defender staffing and reliance on panel attorneys. The AO predicts that if funded at the House level, federal defenders may be required to downsize by 600 positions or more, and another deferment of panel attorney payments could be necessary beginning even earlier next year. This will, according to the AO, impede Defender Services’ ability to uphold the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee … we respectfully urge robust funding for Defender Services in FY26 and any possible action to address the current panel attorney shortfall in FY25.”
In addition to Durbin, the letter is signed by U.S. 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 led Senate Judiciary Democrats in making similar requests for funding for the FY25 and FY24 appropriations bills.
For a PDF of the full letter, click here.
-30-