A Democratic bill with 6 Democratic cosponsors · See all 6 cosponsors
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
This bill is known as the Justice is BLIND Act of 2026. It requires Supreme Court justices, federal judges, magistrate judges, and bankruptcy judges to place certain financial assets into qualified blind trusts. The rule also applies to the spouses and dependent children of these judges. Officials have 90 days from the enactment of the law or from when they take office to comply with this requirement. They must also sign a written statement confirming that they have set up the blind trust or that they do not hold any covered financial interests. Finally, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts is required to post these written statements on a searchable internet database for the public to see.
Yes
- Scored +7
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill requires attestations of asset placement to be made available on a searchable internet database.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Would high-income households be better off under this?
The mandate limits the immediate control and dissolution of certain financial assets for officials and their families upon leaving office.
- Scored -4
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
The bill restricts the ability of individuals to control or dissolve specific financial interests for 180 days after they leave office.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Transparency and Accountability: Under Section 2, adding subsection (g)(3)(B), the Administrative Office of the United States Courts must make the written attestations of judges available on a searchable internet database. This is a positive step because it allows everyday people to easily verify that judges are following the rules and being honest about their financial holdings.
-
Conflict of Interest Reduction: Under Section 2, adding subsection (g)(2)(A) and (g)(2)(B), judges, their spouses, and their dependent children must place covered financial interests into qualified blind trusts within 90 days. This helps the people by ensuring that judges cannot personally profit from court cases or make rulings based on what might help their personal investments.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Potential Burden on Spouses and Families: Under Section 2, adding subsection (g)(2)(A) and (g)(2)(B), the spouses and dependent children of judges are also forced to put their covered financial interests into a blind trust and are barred from controlling those assets until 180 days after the judge leaves office. This could place a heavy and unwanted financial management burden on family members who were not the ones elected or appointed to the judicial position.
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 high-income households be better off under this? — The mandate limits the immediate control and dissolution of certain financial assets for officials and their families upon leaving office. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — The bill restricts the ability of individuals to control or dissolve specific financial interests for 180 days after they leave office.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill requires attestations of asset placement to be made available on a searchable internet database.
- 9/28/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/30/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/20/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Daniel GoldmanDemocrat · New York
Sydney Kamlager-DoveDemocrat · California
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Nellie PouDemocrat · New Jersey
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California