(a) The district judges shall hold office during good behavior.
(b) Each district judge, except in the District of Columbia, the Southern District of New York, and the Eastern District of New York, shall reside in the district or one of the districts for which he is appointed. Each district judge of the Southern District of New York and the Eastern District of New York may reside within 20 miles of the district to which he or she is appointed.
(c) If the public interest and the nature of the business of a district court require that a district judge should maintain his abode at or near a particular place for holding court in the district or within a particular part of the district the judicial council of the circuit may so declare and may make an appropriate order. If the district judges of such a district are unable to agree as to which of them shall maintain his abode at or near the place or within the area specified in such an order the judicial council of the circuit may decide which of them shall do so.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646,
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §1 and section 863 of title 48, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Territories and Insular Possessions (Apr. 12, 1900, ch. 191, §34,
Section consolidates the last paragraph of section 1 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., with portions of section 863 of title 48, U.S.C., 1940 ed., with changes in phraseology necessary to effect consolidation.
Provisions of section 1 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., relating to the number of judges in the various districts are incorporated in section 133 of this title.
A portion of section 863 of title 48, U.S.C., 1940 ed., is retained in said title 48. For remainder of section 863, see Distribution Table.
The exception in subsection (b) "except in the District of Columbia" conforms with the recent decision in U.S. ex. rel. Laughlin v. Eicher, 1944, 56 F.Supp. 972, holding that residence requirement of section 1 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., did not apply to district judges in the District of Columbia. (See reviser's note under section 44 of this title.)
The clause in said last paragraph of section 1 of title 28 providing that any district judge, who violates the residence requirement, shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, was omitted. This penalty provision was attached to the residence requirement at the time of compilation of the Revised Statutes of 1878, although it is apparent that Congress only intended that the penalty should be invoked upon the unauthorized practice of law. See U.S. ex. rel. Laughlin v. Eicher, supra, in which an outline of the history of said section 1 of title 28 is given.
1996-Subsec. (b).
1971-Subsec. (c).
1966-Subsec. (a).
1961-Subsec. (c).
1959-Subsec. (a).
1954-Subsecs. (a) and (b) reenacted without change by act Feb. 10, 1954.
Subsec. (c). Act Feb. 10, 1954, substituted entirely new provisions giving the judicial council of the circuit the authority to determine residence of district judges when it is in the public interest and the nature of the business of the district court necessitates the presence of a judge at or near a particular place for holding court in the district or within a particular part of the district, for former provisions relating to residence of one of the district judges for the District of Kansas.
Subsecs. (d), (e). Act Feb. 10, 1954, struck out subsecs. (d) and (e) which related to residence of one of the district judges for the Southern District of California and one of the district judges for the Southern District of Texas.
1949-Subsecs. (c) to (e). Act Aug. 3, 1949, added subsecs. (c) to (e).
Amendment by
Amendment by
Act Feb. 10, 1954, ch. 6, §2(b)(13)(b),