A Democratic bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
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
The Judicial FOIA Expansion Act seeks to amend title 5 of the United States Code to grant the public access to certain records from the United States courts. This includes various judicial entities ranging from the Supreme Court to federal defender organizations. The bill expands the scope of record requests to include items like attorney disciplinary proceedings, judge complaints, and meeting minutes. It also mandates that information provided must be machine-readable. Additionally, the Act authorizes $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2027 to implement these requirements.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +8
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill expands public access to judicial records, including disciplinary proceedings and meeting minutes.
- Scored +3
Does this change how police departments operate?
The bill increases transparency regarding judicial conduct and personnel investigations.
- Scored +2
Does this get reliable internet to more people?
The bill mandates that judicial information be provided in a machine-readable format to improve digital accessibility.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
The expansion of record access may decrease the privacy of judicial personnel and attorneys.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Transparency of Judicial Conduct: The bill allows for the request of records regarding attorney disciplinary proceedings, sanctions, complaints, investigations, and orders against judges or court personnel (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(2)).
-
Access to Judicial Governance Information: The public would be able to access meeting calendars, minutes of the Federal Judicial Conference, and membership lists for its committees (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(2)).
-
Access to Educational and Performance Data: The act includes research and educational material from the Federal Judicial Center, as well as performance reports for judges or personnel (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(2)).
-
Improved Information Accessibility: The bill requires that any information published or provided by a court of the United States be machine-readable (Section 2(a)(2)(3)).
-
Access to Jury and System Records: The bill provides for the request of completed jury selection forms and technical audit or update plans for PACER (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Limitations on Information Availability: The bill specifies that information relating to an ongoing case or information not in the possession of the courts of the United States is not subject to these provisions (Section 2(a)(2)(2)).
-
Exclusion of Specific Judicial Information: The definition of a 'court of the United States' specifically excludes the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Section 2(a)(1)(A)).
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.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill expands public access to judicial records, including disciplinary proceedings and meeting minutes. Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The expansion of record access may decrease the privacy of judicial personnel and attorneys.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill increases transparency regarding judicial conduct and personnel investigations.
- Education And Technology
- Does this get reliable internet to more people? — The bill mandates that judicial information be provided in a machine-readable format to improve digital accessibility.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in cities be better off under this? — Increased transparency in the federal court system provides a public benefit to all residents regardless of location.
- 7/20/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- 4 Cosponsors 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
Sydney Kamlager-DoveDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois