PRIA Logo™
119-hr-10764119th Congress

Executive Settlement Review Act

Sponsored By: Representative Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4]

Introduced

Summary

Creates a strict, public review process for large settlements involving senior executive officials. This bill would require special court review, public notice and comment, and tighter disclosure and evidentiary checks before monetary or nonmonetary relief of $250,000 or more can be awarded to covered persons.

Show full summary
  • Applies to specific covered people and closely affiliated entities. It names the President, Vice President, cabinet members, Executive Office of the President staff paid at or above GS-15, presidential political appointees, special government employees retained by the President, former holders of those roles, their parents, spouses, children, and entities tied to them.
  • Creates a specialized litigation pathway. Suits for covered relief would go to a three-judge panel in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia with appeals to the D.C. Circuit and the court must review settlements for reasonableness, legality, jurisdiction, procedure, and factual support.
  • Forces public notice, comment, and disclosure. Proposed settlements must be filed and published in the Federal Register, opened to a 60-day public comment period with government responses published, while privacy-protected documents may be sealed under the Privacy Act or HIPAA.

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to download

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

5 provisions identified: 0 benefits, 2 costs, 3 mixed.

Limits on large executive settlements

If enacted, the bill would bar a settlement or award of $250,000 or more, or any nonmonetary relief, to a covered person unless special procedural and substantive rules are met. Covered persons seeking such relief would have to sue the United States before a three‑judge District of Columbia panel convened under 28 U.S.C. § 2284. Appeals from the panel’s final judgment would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. This would create a stricter, centralized process for large awards to senior executive officials and close affiliates.

Stronger court review of settlements

If enacted, before approving a proposed judgment the court would have to find approval is not against the public interest and review the proposal for reasonableness, legality, jurisdiction, procedures, and factual support. The court could receive testimony, appoint a special master, seek experts, allow interested parties to participate, and review public comments. The court would have to set aside a proposal that is arbitrary, violates law or rights, exceeds authority, lacks factual support, shows collusion, or is otherwise unfair.

Which officials and affiliates are covered

If enacted, the bill would define a “covered person” to include the President and Vice President, Cabinet members, Executive Office of the President employees paid at or above GS‑15, presidential political appointees and certain special government employees, and people who served in those roles during the appointing President’s term. It would also include the parent, spouse, child, or spouse of a child of those officials and certain affiliated entities that own or control or can influence important matters. Mere employment in a non‑officer role would not by itself count as an affiliation.

Limits on using agreed facts

If enacted, a fact that parties agreed to in a covered suit could be used against a party in another case only if there was sufficient supporting evidence. An agreed fact would not count as prima facie evidence against that party in a later action. This would limit the automatic evidentiary weight of settlement stipulations.

Public notice and 60-day comment

If enacted, proposed settlements or awards covered by the bill would have to be filed with the D.C. three‑judge panel and published in the Federal Register. The public would get 60 days to file written comments, unless a court shortens that time for extraordinary reasons that do not harm the public interest. The Attorney General would set procedures, the government would publish materials it considered determinative, privacy‑protected records (Privacy Act, HIPAA) could be sealed, and the parties would file briefs and responses after the comment period.

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4]

WI • D

Cosponsors

  • Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]

    DC • D

    Sponsored 10/9/2026

  • Rep. Horsford, Steven [D-NV-4]

    NV • D

    Sponsored 10/15/2026

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov
Back to Legislation