Skip to content

JUD-001 — Executive Compliance and Civil Contempt Accountability Act

A BILL

To amend section 401 of title 18, United States Code, to strengthen civil contempt tools for willful executive-branch noncompliance with federal court orders; to amend section 1304 of title 31, United States Code, to prohibit payment of personally imposed contempt penalties from the Judgment Fund; and for other purposes.

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 “Executive Compliance and Civil Contempt Accountability Act.”

SEC. 2. PURPOSES.

The purposes of this Act are to—

  1. strengthen enforcement of lawful federal court orders directed to the United States, federal agencies, federal officers, and persons acting under color of federal executive authority;
  2. require identification of an executive-branch official with legal or practical authority over compliance where executive implementation is disputed;
  3. provide courts with prompt, sworn compliance information before noncompliance becomes irreversible;
  4. preserve ordinary appeal, stay, clarification, modification, privilege, due-process, and national-security safeguards;
  5. authorize calibrated civil-contempt remedies for willful executive noncompliance; and
  6. ensure that civil-contempt monetary penalties imposed personally for willful noncompliance are not shifted to taxpayers, agency funds, appropriated funds, reimbursement mechanisms, indemnification mechanisms, or the Judgment Fund.

SEC. 3. EXECUTIVE COMPLIANCE CIVIL CONTEMPT.

Section 401 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—

  1. by striking “A court of the United States shall have power” and inserting “(a) In general.—A court of the United States shall have power”;
  2. by adding at the end the following:

“(b) Executive compliance civil contempt.

“(1) Definitions.

“In this subsection:

“(A) Covered executive order means a lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, injunction, stay, mandamus order, habeas-related order, discovery order, sanctions order, or other command issued by a court of the United States that requires or prohibits action by the United States, an executive agency, an officer or employee of the United States, or any person acting under color of federal executive authority.

“(B) Executive agency has the meaning given in section 105 of title 5.

“(C) Responsible official means an officer or employee of the United States who has legal authority, supervisory authority, operational control, custody of relevant records or persons, or practical ability to take materially necessary steps to comply with a covered executive order.

“(D) Willful noncompliance means intentional, knowing, reckless, or bad-faith disobedience of or resistance to a covered executive order by a responsible official who had notice of the order and legal or practical ability to comply, to cause compliance, or to take materially necessary compliance steps.

“(E) Public funds means appropriated funds, agency funds, settlement funds, representational funds, reimbursement authority, indemnification authority, insurance purchased or funded by the United States or an executive agency, the Judgment Fund established under section 1304 of title 31, or any other money provided by the United States or an executive agency.

“(2) Responsible-official designation.

“In a proceeding involving alleged, threatened, or reasonably foreseeable noncompliance with a covered executive order, the court may, on motion or on its own initiative, require the United States, the relevant executive agency, or the relevant federal officer to designate one or more responsible officials.

“A designation under this paragraph shall—

“(A) identify each responsible official by name, title, agency, component, and official contact information;

“(B) describe the official's authority and practical role in implementing the covered executive order;

“(C) identify any other agency, component, contractor, custodian, or officer whose cooperation is materially necessary for compliance;

“(D) be signed under penalty of perjury by the designated official and by counsel of record for the United States or relevant agency; and

“(E) be filed within the time set by the court.

“If the United States or relevant agency fails to make a timely and adequate designation, the court may identify a presumptive responsible official based on the record and may require that official, the official's supervisor, or agency counsel to show cause why the official should not be treated as a responsible official for purposes of this subsection.

“(3) Compliance plan.

“The court may require a responsible official to file a sworn compliance plan.

“A compliance plan shall state, to the extent applicable—

“(A) the steps taken to comply;

“(B) the steps remaining to achieve compliance;

“(C) the officials, agencies, components, contractors, custodians, or other persons whose action is necessary for compliance;

“(D) the timeline for each remaining compliance step;

“(E) any claimed legal, practical, privilege, security, foreign-affairs, custody, logistical, or impossibility obstacle to compliance;

“(F) the records, communications, notices, directives, holds, or instructions issued to preserve compliance capacity; and

“(G) whether the responsible official contends that clarification, modification, stay, mandamus, or appellate relief is necessary.

“(4) Compliance reports.

“The court may require periodic sworn compliance reports from a responsible official until the covered executive order is satisfied, stayed, modified, dissolved, or otherwise terminated.

“Each report shall identify material compliance steps, remaining obstacles, any change in responsible officials or implementation authority, and any material risk that compliance will not occur within the time required by the court.

“(5) Expedited show-cause proceedings.

“Upon a credible allegation of noncompliance with a covered executive order, the court may issue an expedited order to show cause.

“In a proceeding under this paragraph, the court may—

“(A) require testimony, declarations, records, privilege logs, custody information, agency directives, implementation notices, or other evidence relevant to compliance;

“(B) require the responsible official, agency counsel, or supervising officials to appear personally or remotely;

“(C) set an expedited evidentiary hearing;

“(D) make findings regarding notice, authority, practical ability to comply, good-faith efforts, impossibility, ambiguity, privilege, and willfulness; and

“(E) issue coercive, compensatory, remedial, or compliance-preserving orders consistent with law.

“(6) Civil-contempt sanctions for willful noncompliance.

“If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that a responsible official engaged in willful noncompliance, the court may impose civil-contempt sanctions necessary to coerce compliance, compensate injured parties, remedy delay, preserve the court's authority, or prevent further evasion.

“Sanctions under this paragraph may include—

“(A) coercive monetary penalties;

“(B) compensatory monetary relief for costs, fees, and expenses caused by noncompliance;

“(C) remedial orders preserving records, persons, funds, custody, operational capacity, or agency action necessary for compliance;

“(D) adverse factual findings where permitted by law;

“(E) fee shifting and public-cost awards;

“(F) referral to an inspector general, disciplinary authority, or congressional committee with jurisdiction; and

“(G) any other civil-contempt remedy authorized by law.

“(7) Personal payment of coercive monetary penalties.

“A coercive monetary penalty imposed against a responsible official under paragraph (6) for willful noncompliance shall be payable personally by that responsible official.

“No public funds may be used, directly or indirectly, to pay, reimburse, indemnify, satisfy, compromise, offset, or insure against a monetary penalty described in this paragraph, unless a later Act of Congress specifically authorizes payment of the identified penalty or class of penalties.

“No officer or employee of the United States may authorize, approve, facilitate, or conceal payment prohibited by this paragraph.

“Nothing in this paragraph prohibits the United States from providing representation, ordinary litigation support, or indemnification for claims other than a personally payable monetary penalty imposed for willful noncompliance under this subsection, to the extent otherwise authorized by law.

“(8) Due process and protected good-faith conduct.

“No responsible official may be sanctioned under this subsection without notice and an opportunity to be heard.

“The court shall not impose a personally payable monetary penalty under paragraph (7) for—

“(A) timely seeking clarification, modification, stay, mandamus, or appellate relief;

“(B) making a nonfrivolous legal argument concerning the scope, validity, or application of a covered executive order;

“(C) asserting a privilege, classification, national-security, foreign-affairs, custody, or impossibility claim in good faith and with sufficient information for judicial review;

“(D) failing to perform an act outside the official's legal authority or practical ability; or

“(E) noncompliance caused by ambiguity, impossibility, lack of notice, good-faith mistake, or another circumstance inconsistent with willful noncompliance.

“(9) Stays and appeals.

“This subsection does not alter any right to seek a stay, appeal, mandamus, certification, or other review.

“The filing of an appeal, mandamus petition, stay motion, clarification motion, or modification motion does not by itself suspend a covered executive order unless a court so orders.

“An appeal from an order imposing a personally payable monetary penalty under paragraph (7) shall be expedited to the greatest practicable extent.

“(10) Notice to oversight institutions.

“If, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, the court expressly finds that an executive agency materially failed to comply with a covered executive order, or finds willful noncompliance by a responsible official under paragraph (6), the clerk shall transmit the order and findings to—

“(A) the inspector general of the relevant agency;

“(B) the Attorney General;

“(C) the head of the relevant agency;

“(D) the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives;

“(E) the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate;

“(F) the Speaker, majority leader, and minority leader of the House of Representatives;

“(G) the majority leader and minority leader of the Senate;

“(H) the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate, for distribution, in accordance with the rules and procedures of the respective House, to the chair and ranking minority member of any other congressional committee with jurisdiction over the agency, program, appropriation, or subject matter; and

“(I) the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.

“The clerk shall transmit the public versions of the order and findings, or a public docket statement entered by the court if protected information prevents public filing. Protected material may be transmitted only through a lawful secure procedure and only to an authorized recipient.

“The clerk shall transmit a prompt supplemental notice after an express written order, judgment, or docket entry stays, reverses, vacates, modifies, clarifies, or supersedes the finding or underlying order, or records satisfaction, purge, or compliance.

“Notice under this paragraph is informational and remedial. It does not limit the court's enforcement authority, establish criminal liability or entitlement to investigation, require criminal prosecution, or require Congress or any recipient to act.

“(11) Relationship to other authority.

“This subsection supplements and does not limit—

“(A) subsection (a);

“(B) section 1361 of title 28;

“(C) section 1651 of title 28;

“(D) section 566 of title 28;

“(E) the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

“(F) habeas corpus authority;

“(G) inherent judicial authority;

“(H) any other contempt, sanctions, fee-shifting, disciplinary, remedial, or enforcement authority; or

“(I) any lawful authority of Congress, inspectors general, or agency heads.

“Nothing in this subsection authorizes criminal prosecution by a person not otherwise authorized by law to conduct such prosecution.

“(12) Rules of construction.

“Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to—

“(A) authorize a court to direct policy discretion committed by law to the executive branch beyond the relief otherwise lawfully available;

“(B) require disclosure of privileged, classified, national-security, law-enforcement-sensitive, foreign-affairs, or protected information except under procedures authorized by law;

“(C) impair lawful emergency action where compliance is impossible and the responsible official promptly informs the court;

“(D) alter sovereign immunity except to the extent necessary to enforce a covered executive order otherwise within the court's jurisdiction;

“(E) limit substitution, official-capacity litigation, or representation rules otherwise provided by law; or

“(F) authorize payment from public funds of a personally payable monetary penalty imposed under paragraph (7).”.

SEC. 4. JUDGMENT FUND LIMITATION.

Section 1304(a) of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

“No amount may be paid under this section to pay, reimburse, indemnify, satisfy, compromise, offset, or insure against a personally payable monetary penalty imposed on a responsible official for willful noncompliance under section 401(b)(7) of title 18, unless a later Act of Congress specifically authorizes payment of the identified penalty or class of penalties.”.

SEC. 5. PUBLIC EXECUTIVE-NONCOMPLIANCE REGISTER.

Section 604(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended—

(1) in paragraph (25), by striking the period and inserting “; and”; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

“(26) establish and maintain a free, searchable, downloadable, and durable online register of the public materials transmitted under section 401(b)(10) of title 18, which shall identify the court, case, docket number, date, responsible official (if identified), agency, and current status; link to the public order, finding, and available docket information; publish each supplemental notice promptly and with prominence reasonably equal to the original finding; preserve an auditable correction history; and disclose no classified, sealed, grand-jury, personal, privileged, or other information lawfully protected from public disclosure.”.

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE; APPLICATION.

This Act shall take effect 30 days after the date of enactment.

This Act applies to covered executive orders issued on or after the effective date of this Act and to continuing noncompliance occurring on or after the effective date of this Act, regardless of when the underlying proceeding commenced.

SEC. 7. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this Act, any amendment made by this Act, or any application of such provision or amendment is held invalid, the remainder shall not be affected.

If the personal-payment rule in section 401(b)(7) of title 18, United States Code, or the Judgment Fund limitation in section 1304(a) of title 31, United States Code, is held invalid in any application, the remaining responsible-official designation, compliance-plan, reporting, show-cause, contempt, fee-shifting, remedial, notice, and oversight provisions shall remain enforceable to the maximum extent permitted by law.

Budgetary Impact Statement

The Act adds clerk transmission, protected-information handling, status updates, and an Administrative Office public register to existing compliance and contempt work. It creates no new court or investigative body. No reliable dollar estimate is assigned pending judiciary workload and systems data.

Note: Preliminary ARRP assessment only; not a CBO, OMB, agency, or legislative-counsel score.

Drafting Notes

  • This draft amends existing contempt authority in 18 U.S.C. § 401 rather than creating a new freestanding Title 28 enforcement section.
  • The draft preserves related existing authorities, including mandamus jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1361, the All Writs Act under 28 U.S.C. § 1651, and the Marshals Service duty to execute federal court orders under 28 U.S.C. § 566.
  • The Judgment Fund amendment to 31 U.S.C. § 1304 is included to prevent public payment of personally imposed contempt penalties.
  • The proposal intentionally leaves non-executive initiation of criminal contempt or related prosecution to separate congressional and prosecution-independence issues, including CONG-001.
  • The notice and register provisions implement JUD-005's preferred coordinated remedy. The informational notice trigger covers an express finding of material agency noncompliance as well as a willfulness finding against a responsible official; only the latter activates JUD-001's personal civil-contempt sanctions. A JUD-001 finding may support an otherwise authorized DOJ-007 application, but it does not itself establish criminality, extraordinary executive conflict, or entitlement to independent counsel.
  • Civil-contempt doctrine review should include United Mine Workers v. Bagwell, Shillitani v. United States, Spallone v. United States, and Hutto v. Finney, with special attention to purgeability, compensation, coercion, due process, individual-official caution, and fee or cost remedies.
  • The personal-payment rule needs legislative-counsel or qualified legal review before publication-ready use, especially as to due process, federal indemnification, Judgment Fund practice, the Appropriations Clause, and federal-officer representation.
  • The internal project source review indicates that appellate treatment of Judge Boasberg's Alien Enemies Act contempt inquiry increases the need for explicit statutory standards while also increasing legal-risk scrutiny. The draft should preserve a narrow fit to clear orders, notice, practical ability to comply, willfulness, and purgeability.
  • The internal project review identified a hostile prior legislative comparator: a reported House-passed contempt-enforcement restriction in 2025 budget-reconciliation materials. The restriction was not verified as enacted in Public Law 119-21, so it should be treated as political-risk and prior-vehicle context rather than current law.

Source Notes

  • The draft should be reviewed for Article II, Article III, due process, sovereign immunity, appropriations, indemnification practice, federal-officer representation, classified-information procedures, privilege, habeas practice, and appellate jurisdiction.
  • Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 53 and 70 should be sourced, where practicable, from the official U.S. Courts Current Rules of Practice and Procedure materials rather than development-stage secondary rule references.
  • Before public release, official court or docket sources should replace secondary or RECAP-only support where available for the Alien Enemies Act, Abrego Garcia, Melgar-Salmeron, and New Jersey U.S. Attorney's Office examples.