Federal Judiciary Budget Crisis and Government Shutdown Ends Funding for Indigent Defendants, Raising Serious Constitutional Concerns

On October 17, 2025, the fed­er­al judi­cia­ry announced that start­ing on October 20, the branch would no longer have the funds need­ed to ​“sus­tain full, paid oper­a­tions.” This lat­est devel­op­ment is a direct result of the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment shut­down that began on October 1. Until fund­ing is restored, fed­er­al judges will con­tin­ue their bench duties, but court staff may only per­form ​“activ­i­ties” nec­es­sary for con­sti­tu­tion­al func­tions — all with­out pay. The cur­rent fund­ing cri­sis com­pounds an already exist­ing cri­sis that began on July 3, 2025, when the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) pro­gram that com­pen­sates court-appoint­ed pri­vate attor­neys ran out of money.

The fed­er­al judiciary’s finan­cial cri­sis has prompt­ed seri­ous con­sti­tu­tion­al con­cerns in crim­i­nal cas­es, espe­cial­ly regard­ing indi­gent defen­dants with appoint­ed coun­sel. On October 18, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge David Urias grant­ed an emer­gency motion for a stay of pro­ceed­ings in the cap­i­tal case against Labar Tsethlikai, acknowl­edg­ing that ​“the right to a defense is one of the bedrock prin­ci­ples of this coun­try, and the shut­down has unques­tion­ably imped­ed [Mr. Tsethlikai’s] right to coun­sel in this case.”

Mr. Tsethlikai faces fed­er­al mur­der charges along with sev­er­al oth­er charges relat­ed to kid­nap­ping and sex­u­al assault. In June 2025, the U.S. Attorney’s Office of New Mexico announced its intent to seek the fed­er­al death penal­ty for Mr. Tsethlikai, a deci­sion that rais­es the stakes, and makes ade­quate legal rep­re­sen­ta­tion even more imper­a­tive. In its motion request­ing a stay of pro­ceed­ings, Mr. Tsethlikai’s defense team not­ed they ​“have grave con­cerns about the abil­i­ty to effec­tive­ly rep­re­sent Mr. Tsethlikai as required by the Sixth Amendment and to uncov­er nec­es­sary mit­i­gat­ing infor­ma­tion for the jury to make the indi­vid­u­al­ized deter­mi­na­tion with the ​‘height­ened reli­a­bil­i­ty’ required by the Eighth Amendment.” Without ade­quate fund­ing, defense coun­sel will not have the resources nec­es­sary to assure a prop­er and thor­ough inves­ti­ga­tion into their client’s alleged crime and life expe­ri­ences. Defense coun­sel point­ed to sev­er­al cap­i­tal cas­es that have been over­turned in the last decade because of inad­e­quate inves­ti­ga­tion into the defendant’s life his­to­ry in the estab­lish­ment of mitigating evidence.

The motion also details that some mem­bers of Mr. Tsethlikai’s defense team ini­tial­ly con­tin­ued work on his case with­out pay after the July 3 bud­get short­fall, rely­ing on the notion they would receive com­pen­sa­tion when the fed­er­al bud­get was expect­ed to be replen­ished with the start of the new fis­cal year on October 1. The gov­ern­ment shut­down shat­tered that expectation. 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Mexico opposed defense counsel’s request for a stay of pro­ceed­ings, argu­ing that Mr. Tsethlikai’s motion was a tac­tic meant to ​“delay jus­tice.” The gov­ern­ment not­ed that this is the only motion of its kind that has been filed by the Federal Defender’s Office, and that because there is no sched­ul­ing order in place for the first phase of Mr. Tsethlikai’s tri­al, the prop­er rem­e­dy would extend dead­lines, not grant a stay.

According to the order grant­i­ng the emer­gency stay of pro­ceed­ings, one essen­tial team mem­ber has been forced to use funds from their retire­ment account to cov­er basic liv­ing expens­es. A defense expert who intend­ed to work on Mr. Tsethlikai’s case told defense coun­sel they could not do any work until the bud­get cri­sis end­ed. Judge Urias wrote that “[t]he Court has no rea­son to doubt defense counsel’s asser­tions and it can­not ignore the mas­sive impact that the fed­er­al shut­down has had on Defendant’s right to counsel.”

Federal law­mak­ers have also expressed con­cerns about the judiciary’s bud­get cri­sis. Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin said the ​“laps­es in fund­ing for our fed­er­al courts could soon mean jus­tice delayed — or even jus­tice denied.” Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, chair­man of the Judiciary Committee, stat­ed he would push for leg­is­la­tion that would guar­an­tee fund­ing for fed­er­al courts if there were to be fund­ing laps­es in the future.