H.R. 5649: Judicial Accountability for Public Safety Act of 2025

This bill, titled the **Judicial Accountability for Public Safety Act of 2025**, aims to hold judicial officers accountable for their actions during bond determinations and sentencing decisions. It establishes a process for civil liability if a person can demonstrate that they were harmed due to a judicial officer's actions that displayed either intentional disregard for public safety or gross negligence.

Civil Liability

The bill allows any individual injured by a judicial officer's decision, made with intentional disregard for public safety or through gross negligence, to file a civil lawsuit. They must prove their case by clear and convincing evidence. Potential relief for the injured party may include punitive damages, which are meant to punish the wrongdoer and deter similar conduct in the future.

Limitations on Judicial Immunity

This legislation explicitly states that any immunity that judicial officers might claim under existing federal or state laws cannot be used in these civil actions. This means that judges could be held responsible for their decisions in a way that they normally might not be in other legal situations.

Definitions

Key terms in the bill are defined as follows:

• Judicial officer: Any judge or magistrate at the federal or state level involved in criminal proceedings, including district judges, bankruptcy judges, and local judges.
• Intentional disregard for public safety: Acting in a way that knowingly overlooks evidence or legal requirements that would impact community safety in bond or sentencing decisions.
• Bond determination: Refers to court decisions regarding bail, pretrial releases, or conditions under which a person can be released from custody.
• Sentencing decision: Encompasses various judicial actions taken after a conviction, including imprisonment, probation, parole, supervised release, and any conditions placed on release or other consequences like forfeiture.

Good Faith Actions

The bill also includes a provision that ensures it does not apply to judicial acts performed in good faith or within the scope of reasonable judicial discretion. This is intended to protect judges who make legitimate judicial decisions without malintent.

Implications

The introduction of this bill indicates a structured approach to the evaluation of judicial decisions and aims to enhance accountability in the judicial process, particularly concerning safety-related decisions made by judges. By providing a clear avenue for civil actions against judicial officers, the bill attempts to address concerns about the potential leniency or negligence in decisions that could affect the safety of the public.

Relevant Companies

None found