H.R. 2657 · 107th Congress · enacted
District of Columbia Family Court Act of 2001
Became Public Law No: 107-114.
Latest official action 2002-01-08 · Enacted
The bill, briefly
District of Columbia Family Court Act of 2001 - Amends the District of Columbia Code to rename the Family Division of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia as the Family Court of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Grants the Family Court exclusive jurisdiction over currently mandated actions, applications, determinations, adjudications, and proceedings, except that those actions within the jurisdiction of the Domestic Violence Unit (a section of the Civil Division, Criminal Division, and the Family Court) shall remain in that Unit. Sets forth provisions with respect to: (1) special rules regarding the assignment and service of Family Court judges, including "One Family, One Judge;" (2) the administration of cases and proceedings in the Family Court, including alternative dispute resolution procedures; (3) on-site coordination of social services and other related services; (4) treatment of hearing commissioners as magistrate judges; and (5) special rules for Family Court magistrate judges. Requires the Family Court presiding judge to carry out an ongoing training program in family law and related matters for Family Court and other Superior Court judges, and appropriate nonjudicial personnel. Requires the Executive Officer of the D.C. courts to establish an electronic tracking and management system for Family Court cases and proceedings, with all records and…
Congressional Research Service · 2001-07-26
Who reported lobbying on this bill?
Amount spent specifically on this bill: not disclosed
The reports below name this bill and disclose an organization’s overall lobbying expenses or a firm’s client income for the period. They can cover many bills and issues. These amounts are not payments to the bill or its politicians.
No matching lobbying report is imported yet. This is not evidence that no lobbying occurred.
2,409 latest lobbying reports imported. Some source imports are still in progress.
Politicians behind the bill
Sponsors and cosponsors from the official source, limited to members currently in office. Campaign amounts are cycle-wide and are not payments for this bill.
3 of 3 source cosponsor records retrieved; only current officials and unwithdrawn sponsorships appear.
PAC donors to the listed sponsors
These are all-cycle contributions to the listed sponsors’ and cosponsors’ campaigns. FEC does not attribute them to this bill. A donation plus sponsorship does not establish why a politician acted.
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION - COPE$2,500
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $2,500
Official PAC recordTRANSPORTATION INTERMEDIARIES ASSOCIATION'S TIAPAC$2,500
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $2,500
Official PAC recordTRUCKING POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS INC.$2,500
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $2,500
Official PAC recordTRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS COMMITTEE$1,500
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $1,500
Official PAC recordNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$1,000
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $1,000
Official PAC recordUNITED AIRLINES, INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (UAPAC)$1,000
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $1,000
Official PAC recordVERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (VERIZON PAC)$1,000
Eleanor Holmes Norton · Cosponsor · $1,000
Official PAC recordThe largest 40 donor totals appear here. Open each politician for their complete, paginated PAC donor list.
What happened after enactment?
Dated agency-reported implementation and uptake measures are shown with their scope. They do not by themselves establish causal success. If no evidence is listed, the outcome is not established.
Measured outcome: not established
Enactment alone does not show whether a law improved its intended outcome. We need a dated evaluation, observed result or verified implementation record before claiming success or failure.