Monitor Accountability Act
This bill restricts the cost and length of independent monitorships, which courts use to oversee troubled state and local agencies like police departments and jails. It caps the fees monitors can bill to taxpayers, requires public disclosure of their invoices, and limits each monitor to a single five-year term on one case at a time. The bill also lets the public comment before a monitor is chosen and automatically reassigns any oversight case lasting more than six years to a new federal judge.
What this bill touches.
Who it helps · who it burdens.
Who it helps
- State and local governments under court monitorshipProtected from monitor fees exceeding Judicial Conference limits, and shielded from having monitorship requirements revised unless they have failed to achieve substantial and sustained compliance.
- The publicGains the opportunity to review public notice and submit comments before a monitor is appointed, as well as public access to annual accounting reports of monitor activities and fees.
Who it burdens
- Court-appointed monitorsFaces fee caps set by the Judicial Conference, is restricted to one monitorship assignment at a time, is capped at a 5-year non-renewable term per court order, and must file annual accounting reports detailing fees and services. Existing monitors serving over 6 years must be replaced within 180 days.
- Federal district courtsMust give public notice and accept public comments before appointing monitors, hold hearings before revising monitorship requirements, publicly post annual accounting reports from monitors, and reassign cases to another judge after six years.
- Judicial Conference of the United StatesRequired to establish rules and set maximum fee rates for court-appointed monitors of state or local governments within 180 days of enactment.
The provisions, in plain language.
Show all 8 provisions
Caps the fees court-appointed monitors can charge state or local governments based on Judicial Conference limits, while permitting them to work at reduced rates or pro bono.
Restricts monitors to serving on only one assignment at a time, limits their terms to a maximum of five years, and prohibits reappointment under the same court order.
Requires a court hearing before revising a monitorship, and limits revisions strictly to requirements where the government entity has not achieved substantial and sustained compliance.
Requires any court case with an active monitorship to be transferred to a different federal judge in the district once it has been in place for six years.
Requires monitors to file annual reports detailing their services, fees, and any pro bono work, and requires the court to make those reports public.
Bars a successor monitor from being employed by the same employer as the monitor being replaced.
Requires federal courts to issue public notice and allow the public to comment before appointing a monitor.
Applies the new rules to existing monitorships that have run for at least six years by requiring a new monitor within 180 days and a transfer to a new judge within one year.
Caps the fees court-appointed monitors can charge state or local governments based on Judicial Conference limits, while permitting them to work at reduced rates or pro bono.
Restricts monitors to serving on only one assignment at a time, limits their terms to a maximum of five years, and prohibits reappointment under the same court order.
Requires a court hearing before revising a monitorship, and limits revisions strictly to requirements where the government entity has not achieved substantial and sustained compliance.
Requires any court case with an active monitorship to be transferred to a different federal judge in the district once it has been in place for six years.
Requires monitors to file annual reports detailing their services, fees, and any pro bono work, and requires the court to make those reports public.
How your members of Congress line up
How members voted on Monitor Accountability Act.
Recorded roll calls on this bill, most recent first. Open one to see each member's position.
How it moved.
Show all 20 actions
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- On passage Passed by recorded vote: 219 - 204 (Roll no. 173). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H3480)
- Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 219 - 204 (Roll no. 173). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H3480)
- On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 210 - 213 (Roll no. 172).
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3507-3509)
- POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 8365, the Chair put the question on motion to recommit and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Boyle (PA) demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
- Mr. Boyle (PA) moved to recommit to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H3486)
- The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 8365.
- Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5625, H.R. 6260, H.R. 8365, H. Con. Res. 96 and H.R. 8469. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 5625, H.R. 6260, H.R. 8365, and H.Con.Res. 96 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 8469 under a structured rule. The resolution makes in order one motion to recommit on each bill.
- Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1275. (consideration: CR H3480-3486)
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1275 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5625, H.R. 6260, H.R. 8365, H. Con. Res. 96 and H.R. 8469. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 5625, H.R. 6260, H.R. 8365, and H.Con.Res. 96 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 8469 under a structured rule. The resolution makes in order one motion to recommit on each bill.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 551.
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 119-635.
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 13 - 11.
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Introduced in House
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- On passage Passed by recorded vote: 219 - 204 (Roll no. 173). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H3480)
- Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 219 - 204 (Roll no. 173). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H3480)
- On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 210 - 213 (Roll no. 172).
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1275 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5625, H.R. 6260, H.R. 8365, H. Con. Res. 96 and H.R. 8469. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 5625, H.R. 6260, H.R. 8365, and H.Con.Res. 96 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 8469 under a structured rule. The resolution makes in order one motion to recommit on each bill.
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 119-635.
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 13 - 11.
- Introduced in House
Read it for yourself.
Sources & provenance
Cite this page
Civic Herald. “Monitor Accountability Act (H.R. 8365, 119th Congress).” https://civicherald.app/bills/119-hr-8365. Congress.gov record as of Aug 10, 2026.