A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
H.R. 9095, known as the Right to Trial Act, was introduced in the House to protect the constitutional right to a trial. It aims to discourage giving longer sentences to defendants who choose to go to trial instead of taking a plea offer. The bill updates sentencing factors that judges must consider. It also allows judges to give sentences below the statutory minimum to protect this constitutional right.
Yes· 3 of 8
- Scored +9
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Strongly protects constitutional due process rights by shielding defendants from punitive sentence enhancements for requesting a trial.
- Scored +8
Does this shorten or soften prison sentences?
Protects defendants from receiving longer sentences for exercising their constitutional right to trial and allows judges to sentence below statutory minimums.
- Scored +6
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income defendants are disproportionately impacted by mandatory minimums and lack of resources to go to trial; this bill provides judicial flexibility.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Trial Rights: Section 2(a) adds a new factor requiring judges to protect the constitutional right to a trial by prohibiting increased sentences based on a defendant's decision to go to trial instead of accepting a plea offer. This benefits defendants by ensuring they are not punished for exercising their constitutional rights.
-
Fairness Compared to Codefendants: Section 2(a) requires judges to look at plea offers and sentences of similarly situated codefendants or other people charged in the same offense who pled guilty. This helps ensure fairer and more balanced sentencing across related cases.
-
Relief from Mandatory Minimums: Section 2(b) gives courts the clear authority to impose a sentence below the statutory minimum if the minimum sentence would act as a penalty for asserting the right to a trial. This protects individuals from overly harsh mandatory sentences simply because they wanted their day in court.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Based on the provided text, there are no explicitly mentioned negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Helps mitigate racial disparities in sentencing resulting from mandatory minimums and trial penalties. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Provides safeguards against disproportionate sentencing pressures often faced by minority defendants. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income defendants are disproportionately impacted by mandatory minimums and lack of resources to go to trial; this bill provides judicial flexibility. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Benefits individuals involved in the criminal justice system by ensuring fair sentencing practices. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Protects younger defendants from disproportionately harsh plea-bargaining pressures and mandatory minimums.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this shorten or soften prison sentences? — Protects defendants from receiving longer sentences for exercising their constitutional right to trial and allows judges to sentence below statutory minimums. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — Ensures fairer sentencing outcomes across defendants, which positively impacts marginalized groups often subject to harsher mandatory minimums.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Strongly protects constitutional due process rights by shielding defendants from punitive sentence enhancements for requesting a trial.
- 6/2/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia