Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
Bills/119th Congress · House

H.R. 5649

Introduced

Judicial Accountability for Public Safety Act of 2025

Sponsor
RTim Moore· North Carolina
Introduced
September 30, 2025
Policy area
Law
Latest action
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.September 30, 2025
[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5649 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 5649

To provide for civil liability in the case of any judicial officer who 
acts with intentional disregard for public safety or gross negligence 
in a bond determination or sentencing decision.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

September 30, 2025

Mr. Moore of North Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To provide for civil liability in the case of any judicial officer who 
acts with intentional disregard for public safety or gross negligence 
in a bond determination or sentencing decision.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Judicial Accountability for Public 
Safety Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. CIVIL LIABILITY.

(a) Cause of Action.--Any person who establishes by clear and 
convincing evidence that such person was injured by any action taken, 
with intentional disregard for public safety or with gross negligence, 
by a judicial officer in a bond determination or sentencing hearing may 
obtain, in a civil action, such relief as the court may determine 
appropriate, which may include punitive damages.
(b) Rule of Construction.--This Act may not be construed to apply 
to a judicial act taken in good faith or within the scope of ordinary 
judicial discretion.
(c) Limitation on Immunity.--Any immunity otherwise applicable to 
such a judicial officer under Federal or State law may not be asserted 
in a civil action under this section.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Act:
(1) The term ``judicial officer'' means--
(A) any United States district judge, magistrate 
judge, bankruptcy judge, or other Federal judicial 
officer; and
(B) any State or local judge or magistrate,
acting in a criminal proceeding.
(2) The term ``intentional disregard for public safety'' 
means an intentional act or omission that ignores or overrides 
evidence, statutory mandates, or clear risks to community 
safety in the exercise of bond or sentencing discretion.
(3) The term ``bond determination'' includes any judicial 
order regarding bail, pretrial release, or conditions of 
release.
(4) The term ``sentencing decision'' includes any judicial 
order, issued upon conviction, that imposes--
(A) a term of imprisonment, probation, parole, 
supervised release, or involuntary commitment;
(B) any conditions on release;
(C) forfeiture; or
(D) any other criminal sanction.
<all>

Plain-language analysis

Not yet analyzed.

A plain-language breakdown — including any hidden or off-intent provisions and whether the bill was fast-tracked — is generated separately and reviewed before publishing. It will appear here once ready. Until then, the verbatim text above and the official source are the record.

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →