Court backlogs are the accumulation of unresolved cases that outpace a court’s ability to decide them, and in the United States and abroad they have grown into a defining strain on the justice system, driven by pandemic disruptions layered onto decades of flat judgeships, staffing shortages, and rising filings. The result reaches far beyond courthouses: defendants sit in jail awaiting trial, victims wait years for resolution, and civil disputes stall indefinitely.
How Big the Backlogs Are
The largest backlog in any American court system belongs to immigration courts. As of February 2026, there were 3,318,099 active cases pending, with roughly 70 percent — about 2.3 million — involving people awaiting asylum hearings or decisions.1TRAC Immigration. Immigration Court Quick Facts The pending caseload sits most heavily in Florida (522,005), Texas (370,362), California (355,706), and New York (317,590).2TRAC Immigration. Immigration Court Backlog Tool
Federal district courts face a smaller but worsening problem. Between 2004 and 2024, civil cases pending more than three years rose 346 percent, from 18,280 to 81,617.3United States Courts. Need for Additional Judgeships: Litigants Suffer When Cases Linger State courts show the same pattern. New Jersey’s Superior Court backlog doubled from 39,323 in June 2019 to 81,415 by January 2024.4New Jersey Courts. New Jersey Judiciary Strategic Plan Unresolved cases in New York City courts rose 34 percent between 2019 and 2024, and some appellate panels now take nearly three years just to schedule argument.5New York Focus. Uncap Justice Act and New York Court Backlog
The problem crosses borders. The Crown Court outstanding caseload in England and Wales hit roughly 80,200 cases by the end of December 2025, more than double its December 2019 level and the highest since 2016.6UK Parliament. Crown Court Backlog Research Briefing Some trials there have been scheduled as late as October 2029, pushing waits to four years.7The Guardian. Crown Court Backlog Reaches Record High
Why Courts Fell Behind
COVID-19 is the visible trigger. Courthouse closures and jury trial suspensions in 2020 and 2021 dumped a surge of unprocessed cases into a system that was already fraying. One survey of 238 judges and court professionals put the average case backlog per court at 958 in 2019 and 1,274 in 2021.8Nevada Courts. Impacts of the Pandemic on State and Local Courts But the deeper causes had been building for decades.
Staffing Shortages
Over 70 percent of state courts reported staffing shortages in 2025, and 61 percent expected the shortages to continue. Courts cannot match private-sector salaries, and retirement waves are draining institutional knowledge faster than replacements arrive.9National Center for State Courts. Preparing for Future Workforce Needs In Georgia, assistant district attorneys turned over at a five-year average of 25 percent, peaking at 43.5 percent in 2021, and eight of 49 judicial circuits had vacancy rates above 25 percent.10Stateline. Shortage of Prosecutors, Judges Leads to Widespread Court Backlogs Some Colorado prosecutor offices reported attorney vacancy rates above 50 percent.11The Conversation. Colorado Criminal Cases Are Dismissed at a Higher Rate When Prosecutors Face Heavier Workloads
The bench is thin too. New Jersey’s Superior Court judicial vacancies climbed from 12 in January 2018 to 58 in January 2024.4New Jersey Courts. New Jersey Judiciary Strategic Plan New York’s constitution, dating to 1846, caps the number of Supreme Court justices at one per 50,000 people, a formula that has left Manhattan and the Bronx at their constitutional ceiling. More than 700 judges from other courts have been reassigned to act as “acting” Supreme Court justices just to manage the overflow.12State Court Report. Proposed Law Could Eliminate Cap on Number of Judges in New York Iowa’s chief justice has warned the state is “a whisper away” from a judicial opening attracting only a single applicant.13National Center for State Courts. Chief Justices: State Courts Are Built to Withstand Toughest Challenges
Thirty-Five Years Without New Federal Judgeships
Congress has not enacted a comprehensive bill creating new federal judgeships since 1990. In that time, district court filings have grown 30 percent while authorized judgeships have grown only 4 percent.14United States Courts. Judiciary Seeks 71 Judgeships to Meet Growing Caseloads The Judicial Conference recommends adding judges when weighted filings exceed 430 per judgeship. In fiscal year 2024, 20 of the 25 district courts identified for expansion exceeded 500 weighted filings per judgeship, and five topped 700.15Federal Bar Association. JUDGES Act Leave-Behind The Northern District of Florida recorded 4,357 weighted filings per judgeship against a national median of 411.16Congress.gov. Federal District Court Judgeships
Who Pays the Price
People Held Before Trial
When cases cannot move, people who cannot post bail stay in jail. About 465,000 people were in U.S. pretrial detention in 2026: roughly 426,000 in local jails, 24,000 in the federal pretrial system, and the rest in tribal and youth facilities. Since 1997, all net growth in jail populations has come from the pretrial side — people not convicted of a crime. The median bail is $10,000, and detained individuals typically have annual incomes near that figure.17Prison Policy Initiative. Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie Research finds that detained defendants are more likely to be convicted, receive harsher sentences, and become involved with the system again, even after short jail stays.18Vera Institute of Justice. Justice Denied: The Harmful and Lasting Effects of Pretrial Detention
On any given day, about 52,000 people sit in U.S. jails solely on a “failure to appear” warrant with no other charges, collectively spending an estimated 19 million nights in jail each year at a cost of roughly $3.3 billion to sheriffs’ departments.19Prison Legal News. U.S. Jails Hold 52,000 Detainees for Nothing More Than Failure to Appear
Victims and Witnesses
Delay harms victims as much as defendants. UK research documented victims reporting depression, anxiety, insomnia, and suicidal thoughts while waiting years for trial, with witness care officers noting suicide attempts linked to repeated adjournments. Family relationships break down, physical health declines, and employers lose patience with unpredictable court schedules.20College of Policing. Understanding the Impact of Court Delays on Victims In England and Wales, 59 percent of victims in adult rape cases dropped out before charges were filed in the year ending June 2024, partly because they were unwilling to prolong their trauma. The Crown Court’s remand population hit a record 17,600 in September 2024, and 35 percent of people remanded in custody in 2022 did not ultimately receive a custodial sentence; 13 percent were acquitted outright.21UK Parliament Public Accounts Committee. Crown Court Backlog Report
Civil Litigants
Because federal courts must prioritize criminal cases under the Sixth Amendment and the Speedy Trial Act, civil matters move down the queue. Average time from filing to trial in federal civil court is now a little over two years nationally, and in overworked districts it routinely reaches three to four years.3United States Courts. Need for Additional Judgeships: Litigants Suffer When Cases Linger Extended delay drives up attorney fees, expert witness costs, and deposition expenses, and it can leave businesses halting production lines or employees out of work indefinitely.
What the Constitution Requires
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to a speedy trial. The Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in Barker v. Wingo set a four-factor balancing test for whether that right has been violated: the length of the delay, the reason for it, whether the defendant asserted the right, and whether the defendant was prejudiced. Delays caused by overcrowded dockets are treated as “neutral reasons,” weighted less heavily than deliberate interference with a defense, but still counted against the government, which bears ultimate responsibility for the condition of its courts.22Constitution Annotated, Congress.gov. Sixth Amendment Speedy Trial
The only remedy for a constitutional speedy trial violation is dismissal of the charges, as the Court held in Strunk v. United States (1973). Congress added concrete federal timelines in the Speedy Trial Act of 1974: indictment within 30 days of arrest and trial within 70 days of the filing of charges. The Act permits extensions that “serve the ends of justice,” and during the pandemic multiple federal districts issued blanket orders pausing trials on public health grounds. Courts have cautioned that prolonged continuances risk becoming improper if the pandemic is used as a “scapegoat for lack of diligence.”23National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Speedy Trial Resource
The consequences show up in dismissal rates. Hundreds of criminal cases were dismissed in Anchorage, Alaska, in 2024 because there were not enough prosecutors to move them. In New York, after the 2019 passage of discovery reform known as “Kalief’s Law,” statewide dismissals for missed speedy trial deadlines rose from 12,398 in 2019 to 42,212 in 2023.24New York City Bar Association. Criminal Discovery Reform in New York In Colorado, researchers found dismissal rates rise in weeks when prosecutors carry heavier caseloads, and in one judicial district 56 percent of misdemeanor cases in 2025 did not result in a conviction.11The Conversation. Colorado Criminal Cases Are Dismissed at a Higher Rate When Prosecutors Face Heavier Workloads
The Immigration Court Backlog Is Its Own Problem
The U.S. immigration court system runs under the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, and its caseload dwarfs every other court docket in the country. Through February 2026, judges completed 333,957 cases while receiving 201,878 new ones, trimming the total from roughly 3.38 million at the end of 2025 to 3.32 million.25TRAC Immigration. TRAC Immigration Update In fiscal year 2026, 79.6 percent of completed cases ended in removal or voluntary departure orders. Only 33.3 percent of immigrants had an attorney when a removal order was issued in February 2026.1TRAC Immigration. Immigration Court Quick Facts
The Trump administration has pushed to accelerate processing, firing nearly 100 immigration judges during 2025 and replacing them with new appointees; by the start of 2026, courts were operating with fewer than half the judges they had a year earlier.26NPR via VPM. Trump Administration to Shutter an Immigration Court, Adding to Judges’ Backlog27New York City Bar Association. Condemning the Use of Military Lawyers as Temporary Immigration Judges28Brennan Center for Justice. Using Military Lawyers as Immigration Judges Is Ill-Advised and Potentially Illegal Federal data showed that 9 of 10 noncitizens heard by JAG judges were ordered removed or asked to self-deport. In one reported case, a JAG attorney was fired after granting asylum in six of 11 cases heard in a single month.
The San Francisco Immigration Court, once home to 21 judges and one of the highest asylum grant rates in the country, has seen its judicial staff cut to four and is closing its main facility. Roughly 100,000 pending cases are being transferred to the Concord Immigration Court about an hour away, where four sitting judges face 21 empty courtrooms, and cases there have been pushed as far out as 2029.29WYPR. San Francisco Immigration Court Shuts Down Attorneys have called the combined effect a threat to due process; the administration has described the changes as necessary to restore enforcement and reduce a caseload it inherited.30The White House. Era of Amnesty Is Over
What’s Being Done
New Federal Judgeships
In March 2025, the Judicial Conference of the United States asked Congress to create 71 new Article III judgeships, 69 at the district level and two on the courts of appeals. Two-thirds of the proposed district positions would go to California, Florida, New York, and Texas.16Congress.gov. Federal District Court Judgeships Congress passed a bipartisan JUDGES Act in 2024 proposing 66 new district judgeships, but President Biden vetoed it on December 23, 2024.14United States Courts. Judiciary Seeks 71 Judgeships to Meet Growing Caseloads A 2025 version, H.R. 1702, has advanced through the House Judiciary Committee but awaits a floor vote, and a Senate companion bill had not been introduced as of mid-2026.31Federal Bar Association. JUDGES Act Talking Points and FAQs
State-Level Fixes
New York’s proposed “Uncap Justice Act” would amend the state constitution to remove the population-based cap on Supreme Court justices, potentially adding hundreds of judgeships. The measure passed both chambers in a previous session and, if passed again before the session ended in June 2025, was set for the 2026 statewide ballot. It has backing from Governor Hochul and Attorney General James but faces opposition from sitting judges concerned about politicizing the judiciary.5New York Focus. Uncap Justice Act and New York Court Backlog
Harris County, Texas, provides one of the clearest examples of what sustained investment can accomplish. The county used federal pandemic relief money to add six associate judge positions, expand jury operations into facilities like NRG Stadium, hire additional prosecutors, and fund forensic processing overtime. By March 2026, the District Attorney’s Office reported the average number of pending felony cases per court had fallen from a 2021 peak of 2,384 to 728, below pre-2017 levels. The jail population dropped 12 percent year over year, and average custody time fell by 30 days.32Harris County District Attorney’s Office. Harris County Criminal Case Backlog Eliminated
UK Crown Court Reforms
The UK government introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill in February 2026, proposing a new “Crown Court bench division” where a single judge rather than a jury would hear cases expected to carry sentences of up to three years. The most serious offenses, including murder, rape, and robbery, remain excluded. The government projects the reforms will cut Crown Court demand by nearly 20 percent by 2028-29.33UK Parliament Hansard. Courts and Tribunals Bill Second Reading Debate The bill has drawn sharp opposition from the legal profession: over 3,200 lawyers, including retired judges and a former Director of Public Prosecutions, petitioned the Prime Minister to stop the reforms, and the Criminal Law Solicitors’ Association has raised the possibility of strike action.34Bar Council. Leveson Criminal Courts Review Critics argue the government is prioritizing speed over fairness and that productivity improvements offer a better path than restricting jury trials.35Institute for Government. Reviewing Proposed Reforms to Jury Trials
Technology Helps, With Limits
The pandemic forced rapid technology adoption. By 2023, 90 percent of courts surveyed had added video conferencing, and 40 percent reported that virtual hearings outnumber in-person proceedings. In Maricopa County, Arizona, moving eviction hearings online cut the failure-to-appear rate from roughly 40 percent in 2019 to about 13 percent by February 2021.36Pew Charitable Trusts. How Courts Embraced Technology Ten states built new e-filing processes for unrepresented litigants during the first months of the pandemic alone.
The gains come with real costs. Virtual hearings made things harder for people without lawyers, according to 63 percent of court professionals surveyed, and reliable broadband remains out of reach for many; as of 2018, 42 million U.S. adults lacked reliable high-speed internet. A review of nearly 10,000 pandemic-era court orders found none that specifically addressed technology accommodations for users with disabilities or limited English proficiency.36Pew Charitable Trusts. How Courts Embraced Technology
Artificial intelligence has started entering court operations, mostly on the administrative side. State courts have piloted AI chatbots for staff, automated document processing for e-filings, and guardianship monitoring portals.37National Center for State Courts. AI Readiness for the State Courts New Jersey has launched an internal AI pilot, and Arizona has adopted an administrative order sorting AI tools into those approved for all purposes, those limited to public content, and those prohibited. The federal judiciary’s fiscal year 2025 IT plan prioritizes robotic process automation with machine learning for financial management and administrative systems but does not describe AI-driven case triage for reducing backlogs directly.38United States Courts. Long Range Plan for Information Technology: Fiscal Year 2025 Update
Speed Versus Fairness
Court backlogs sit at an uncomfortable intersection. Pushing cases through the system faster risks sacrificing fairness, a concern loudly raised against the UK’s jury trial restrictions and against the U.S. deployment of minimally trained military lawyers as immigration judges. Letting cases languish carries its own costs: constitutional violations, victim attrition, pretrial detention of people who may never be convicted, and public distrust of the courts.
The jurisdictions that have made real progress, Harris County among them, have combined added judges, expanded courtroom space, and prosecutorial support with sustained funding. The hardest obstacles — century-old constitutional caps on judgeships, decades without new federal judge positions, and a public-sector legal labor market that cannot match private salaries — are structural, and no amount of technology or scheduling innovation can fully substitute for enough judges to hear the cases filed.