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. 9277

Introduced

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific principles and methods.

Sponsor
RHarriet M. Hageman· Wyoming
Introduced
June 11, 2026
Policy area
Government Operations and Politics
Latest action
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.June 11, 2026
[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9277 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 9277

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review 
under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence 
that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific 
principles and methods.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 11, 2026

Ms. Hageman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review 
under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence 
that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific 
principles and methods.

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

SECTION 1. EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM RELIABLE SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES AND 
METHODS.

Section 706(2) of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (E) by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (F) by striking the period at the end 
and inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(G) supported by evidence that the court 
determines is not the product of reliable scientific 
principles and methods, or that does not reflect a 
reliable application of those principles and 
methods.''.
<all>

Plain-language analysis

AI analysis · 100% confidence

AI-generated breakdown of the bill text above, checked by an independent review pass before publishing. It is analysis, not the law itself — the verbatim text and official source are the record.

In plain terms

This bill changes the rules for how courts review evidence under the Administrative Procedure Act. It states that courts cannot consider evidence that they decide is not based on reliable scientific principles and methods. This could affect cases where scientific evidence is important, as it sets a standard for what counts as acceptable evidence in court.

Hidden provisions

  • SECTION 1. EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM RELIABLE SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES AND METHODS

    the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific principles and methods

    This provision specifies the criteria for evidence that courts can consider, which is crucial for understanding how scientific evidence will be treated in legal cases.

Questionable / off-intent provisions

No off-intent or questionable provisions were flagged.

Junk / unrelated provisions

No filler or unrelated riders were flagged.

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 →