A Democratic bill with 3 Democratic cosponsors · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the 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
The Judicial Integrity Act aims to amend title 18 of the United States Code. This bill specifically targets officers and employees of the judiciary. It seeks to prohibit these individuals from engaging in official acts that affect their personal financial interests. This includes Federal judges and justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. The bill also updates how regulatory waivers are handled for these officials.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill enhances judicial integrity and transparency by preventing judges from deciding on matters involving their own financial interests.
- Scored +4
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
Ensuring judicial impartiality through conflict-of-interest prohibitions strengthens the due process afforded to those appearing before the courts.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
The bill may create new regulatory burdens or restrictions for high-net-worth individuals holding judicial positions.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest: The bill amends section 208(a) of title 18 to include officers and employees of the judicial branch, including Federal judges and Supreme Court justices, from engaging in official acts affecting personal financial interests (Section 2, subsection a). This aims to prevent judicial branch members from acting on matters that impact their own money.
-
Regulatory Oversight: The bill allows for the Judicial Conference of the United States to issue regulations that can exempt certain financial interests from the prohibition (Section 2, subsection b). This provides a structured process, including public notice and comment, to determine if a financial interest is too remote or inconsequential to affect integrity (Section 2, subsection b, paragraph 5).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are mentioned in the provided text.
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 enhances judicial integrity and transparency by preventing judges from deciding on matters involving their own financial interests. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Ensuring judicial impartiality through conflict-of-interest prohibitions strengthens the due process afforded to those appearing before the courts.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — The bill may create new regulatory burdens or restrictions for high-net-worth individuals holding judicial positions.
- 8/7/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/20/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor 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.
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Andy KimDemocrat · New Jersey
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon