The State Justice Institute (SJI) was established by federal law in 1984 to award grants to improve the quality of justice in state courts, and foster innovative, efficient solutions to common issues faced by all courts.
SJI is unique both in its mission and how it seeks to fulfill it. Only SJI has the authority to assist all state courts – criminal, civil, juvenile, family, and appellate – and the mandate to share the success of one state’s innovations with every state court system. SJI carries out its mandate in various ways that maximize the impact of its funding, including by:
- placing practical products in the hands of the judges and court staff who can most benefit from them;
- addressing national court issues as they occur, and developing solutions to those problems;
- sharing effective approaches from one state quickly and economically with other courts nationwide;
- supporting national, regional, and in-state educational programs to speed the transfer of solutions to issues courts across the nation share; and
- supporting national technical assistance targeting specific issues in the courts.
SJI’s federal mission to support the state courts is critical to the successful implementation of federal policies and programs, most recently in the areas of social services and automated justice information systems development. In almost 300 provisions of federal law, and in federal policy through regulations, policy statements, and other pronouncements, state courts have affirmative and negative obligations. For example, state courts are involved in federal subjects such as child welfare, civil protection orders, crime control, national security, consumer protection, and land and water management. SJI grants better enable the state courts to meet these federal obligations.
SJI is a non-profit corporation governed by an 11-member Board of Directors appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. By law, the President must appoint six state court judges, one state court administrator, and four members of the public (no more than two of whom may be of the same political party). The Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) plays an important role in this process by preparing a nomination list for the President of the Board’s judicial positions and state court administrator position. SJI also has a professional staff who oversee operations, to include grant management and other government relations. Per 42 U.S.C. 10704, the Executive Director is responsible for the executive and administrative operations of SJI, and serves at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. The Executive Director is also a non-voting ex officio member of the Board.
40 YEARS OF IMPROVING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN OUR STATE COURTS
In 2024, SJI released a 40th Anniversary Report highlighting its successes over the past four decades. The report highlights SJI’s numerous grants to state courts and court-support organizations that have improved the administration of justice in the United States. These include projects that have enabled the state courts to respond to the opioid crisis; address mental health issues; adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic; identify victims of human trafficking; improve services for military families; improve court security; promote fiscally sound and data-driven policies and practices on sentencing; and help enhance access to justice. SJI has also supported many worthwhile projects that have promoted state courts’ performance, accountability, and use of innovative technology to transform the business of courts.
In the 1970s, the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) was the driving force behind the creation of SJI. CCJ recognized that there was a vital need to secure federal funding for the state courts. CCJ authorized a task force for a state improvement bill. The task force proposed that an independent agency, called the State Justice Institute, be created to administer a national discretionary grant program to support state courts. In 1979, the task force was succeeded by the CCJ State Justice Institute Committee to work with Congress to create SJI. The Committee was headed by Chief Justice (ret.) Robert Utter from Washington State, who during a 7-year period, flew over 100,000 miles as Chairman of the Committee to build support for the legislation. He was joined by other CCJ members and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA). Senator Howell Heflin, who was a former Chief Justice of the State of Alabama, held hearings and was an original sponsor of legislation to establish SJI. After six years of efforts by the Committee, CCJ, COSCA, state court judges, court administrators, and other key stakeholders, the State Justice Institute Act was signed into law in 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10701 et seq.).
The past decade has been one of significant changes for state and local courts. As courts’ user demands increased, state courts across the United States responded in various ways. Perhaps the most significant change was the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on state court operations. State courts are still working to determine what institutional changes remain post-pandemic. The opioid crisis, compounded with often cooccurring substance use, in both urban and rural communities challenged courts and their justice-system partners to figure out how best to respond to individuals and their families, and determine alternative methods of providing services. The racial justice movement brought the issue of court fines, fees, and bail practices to the forefront, and challenged courts to determine methods of addressing these issues despite the limitations of being only one branch of the government. Finally, rapid technological changes over the past decade led courts to adopt solutions to better serve the public in an online environment.
The first decade of SJI involved building a foundation for how SJI would meet its mission to improve administration in state courts. Key themes that emerged included access to justice; juvenile justice; drug courts (now known more commonly as treatment courts); state-federal court cooperation and jurisdiction over case filings; alternative dispute resolution, including the use of mediation to reduce time commitments and costs for litigants; and the future of state courts in the next decade.
In its second decade, SJI began addressing other major challenges facing the state courts. During the mid- to late 1990s, the public paid much attention to domestic violence and sexual assault in various contexts, spurred by the passage of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994.7 In addition, SJI focused on sentencing reform, improving public trust and confidence in the courts, jury systems improvement efforts, and court security.
SJI’s third decade involved addressing trending issues, some of which were new and required tailored responses. The economic downturn of 2008 led to severe budget reductions for state courts. SJI responded by helping courts reengineer their processes and procedures to adapt to the new budget reality. At the same time, changing demographics in the United States led to even greater demands for language access in the courts, elder issues, a need for education on how immigration issues impact the state courts, and identification of victims of human trafficking. Overlaying SJI’s work during this decade was a focus on improving court governance and performance.
Over the next decade, SJI will leverage funding whenever possible to help the state courts address the most critical issues. SJI will continue to focus on using its Priority Investment Areas to address court issues on a national level and will maintain flexibility to adapt its grant program to address emerging topics. SJI will continue identifying issues that impact all courts, fostering innovative solutions, and sharing information about successful approaches nationwide.