A Democratic bill with 13 Democratic cosponsors · See all 13 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
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 "Fair Access to Swift and Timely Justice Act" aims to amend title 5 of the United States Code regarding the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). This bill seeks to ensure more timely rulings on appeals filed by Federal employees and applicants for employment. If the MSPB has not taken action on an appeal within 120 days, it allows the individual to file a civil action in a U.S. district court. The bill also establishes specific rules for where these civil actions can be filed and how they are reviewed. Additionally, it mandates that the MSPB stay its appeal process once a civil action is filed.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +6
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill enhances due process for federal employees by providing a mechanism for legal recourse when administrative proceedings stall.
- Scored +5
Would union members be better off under this?
The bill strengthens the procedural rights of federal employees, a group frequently represented by labor unions.
- Scored +4
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
Federal employees, who often fall into middle-income brackets, gain more protection for their employment rights.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Right to Civil Action: Employees or applicants for employment who have not received action on their appeal within 120 days can file a civil action in a district court (Section 2(a)(1)). This provides a mechanism for those waiting on a decision.
-
Flexible Filing Locations: Individuals can bring their civil action in the judicial district where the personnel action occurred, where they would have been employed, or where the respondent's principal office is located (Section 2(a)(2)(A) and (B)). This offers specific options for where a case can be brought.
-
Standard of Review: In civil actions, the court will apply the same standard of review for determinations as would have applied to the MSPB's review of the personnel action (Section 2(a)(3)(B)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Mandatory Stay of Appeal: If a civil action is filed, the MSPB must stay its own appeal process regarding that personnel action (Section 2(a)(5)(A)). This means the original appeal process stops while the civil action is underway.
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 union members be better off under this? — The bill strengthens the procedural rights of federal employees, a group frequently represented by labor unions. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Federal employees, who often fall into middle-income brackets, gain more protection for their employment rights.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill enhances due process for federal employees by providing a mechanism for legal recourse when administrative proceedings stall. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — By allowing district court actions, the bill subjects the MSPB's inaction to judicial oversight.
- 6/23/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/18/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/7/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 11 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Angela AlsobrooksDemocrat · Maryland
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey
Tammy DuckworthDemocrat · Illinois
Timothy KaineDemocrat · Virginia
Andy KimDemocrat · New Jersey
Edward MarkeyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Alex PadillaDemocrat · California
Gary PetersDemocrat · Michigan
John ReedDemocrat · Rhode Island
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California
Brian SchatzDemocrat · Hawaii
Chris Van HollenDemocrat · Maryland
Mark WarnerDemocrat · Virginia