WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HR 9786

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit officers and employees of the judiciary from engaging in official acts affecting personal financial interests.

119th Congress Introduced by Dan Goldman and 5 co-sponsors

The bill would bar federal judiciary officers and employees from taking official acts that would directly affect their personal financial interests.

Introduced in House
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HR 9786

Bill overview

  • Bill: HR 9786
  • Session: 119th Congress
  • Jurisdiction: United States
  • Title: To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit officers and employees of the judiciary from engaging in official acts affecting personal financial interests.

Purpose and intent

The measure aims to strengthen integrity and reduce potential conflicts of interest within the federal judiciary by prohibiting judges, magistrate judges, and other judiciary officers and employees from engaging in official acts that would affect their personal financial interests. The goal is to increase public trust in the judiciary by preventing official actions from being influenced by personal financial considerations.

Key provisions (highlights)

  • Prohibition scope: The bill would bar officers and employees of the judiciary from taking official actions (e.g., votes, rulings, orders, decisions, or other duties performed in an official capacity) when such actions would have a direct and personal financial impact on them or certain close associates with a financial stake.
  • Conflict of interest standard: The prohibition center likely on official acts that would affect personal financial interests, potentially including assets, income, investments, or other monetary benefits. The bill would define what constitutes a personal financial interest and what counts as an official act.
  • Applicability: Applies to federal judiciary personnel, potentially including Supreme Court and lower federal court employees and officers, depending on the statutory text.
  • Enforcement and penalties: The bill would specify penalties or remedies for violations, potentially including disciplinary actions, sanctions, or other enforcement mechanisms under federal law.
  • Administrative procedures: May outline processes for disclosures, recusal requirements, or monitoring to ensure compliance, and may include exceptions or safe harbors where appropriate.

Note: The exact definitions, scope, and enforcement details would be specified in the statutory language of the bill (title 18, U.S.C.), which is not fully provided here.

Who/what would be affected

  • Federal judiciary personnel: Judges, magistrate judges, clerks with specified official duties, and other judiciary employees covered by Title 18.
  • Potentially individuals or entities with financial interests connected to official judiciary actions that could be interpreted as personal financial interests.
  • The Department of Justice and other agencies involved in enforcement and oversight of judicial ethics and conflicts of interest.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduction: Introduced in the House and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary (July 20, 2026).
  • Next steps: The committee would consider, potentially mark up, and vote on reporting the bill to the House floor. If passed, it would move to the Senate for consideration, aligned with Senate committee referrals and potential floor action.
  • Sponsor and co-sponsors: Primary sponsor and several co-sponsors, including Dan Goldman, Hank Johnson, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Delia Ramirez, Seth Moulton, and Sydney Kamlager, indicating bipartisan support among some members.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Public trust and ethics: By restricting official acts that could affect personal finances, the bill seeks to reduce conflicts of interest and enhance perceived integrity of the judiciary.
  • Operational considerations: If enacted, judiciary personnel may need to adjust practices around decision-making on matters with financial implications and may require more robust recusal and disclosure protocols.
  • Enforcement: Effectiveness depends on defined penalties and reliable enforcement mechanisms. Clear definitions of what constitutes a personal financial interest and an official act will be critical to avoid ambiguity.

For readers seeking deeper understanding, reviewing the exact text of HR 9786 would clarify the precise definitions, exceptions (if any), and enforcement provisions.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.