Federal RuleAug 21
62
DOL Rewrites Disability Rules for 'Merit-Based Opportunity' Push
RuleLabor DepartmentFederal Contract Compliance Programs OfficeSignificant Wallet
119-hr-6816119th Congress
Shadow Docket Sunlight Act of 2025
Sponsored By: Representative Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2]
Introduced
Summary
Transparency for the Supreme Court's emergency orders. This bill would require the Court to publish written explanations and show how each participating justice voted when it decides preliminary injunctive relief or stays in appeals.
Show full summary
- Families, litigants, and the public would get written explanations that evaluate four criteria for injunction decisions: likelihood of merit, irreparable harm, balance of equities, and public interest. For stays the explanation must assess likelihood of merit, irreparable injury, potential harm to other parties, and public interest.
- Court procedures and justices would have to record each participating justice's vote. Explanations may be issued in one or more opinions representing a majority of participating justices, and the rule applies to cases under Chapter 5 or 7 of Title 5 while excluding administrative or scheduling orders and certain certiorari petitions.
- Congress would receive compliance reports from the Director of the Federal Judicial Center every two years, starting the first April 1 that is more than 180 days after enactment, with an option for the Director to request more time for the initial report.
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.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
1 provisions identified: 1 benefits, 0 costs, 0 mixed.
Supreme Court would explain injunction decisions
If enacted, the Supreme Court would have to publish written reasons when it grants, denies, or vacates a preliminary injunction, or a stay of such relief, in cases on appeal. The Court would also show how each participating justice voted. For injunctions, the explanation would cover chance of winning, irreparable harm, the balance of equities, and the public interest. For stays, it would cover a strong showing of likely success, irreparable injury without a stay, harm to others, and the public interest. One or more opinions from a majority of the participating justices could satisfy this. It would not apply to orders only about scheduling or administration, or to cert petitions that do not rule on injunctions or stays. It would not change the legal standards courts use or the Court’s jurisdiction. It would also cover orders tied to claims under Title 5, chapters 5 or 7.
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2]
NC • D
Cosponsors
Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8]
MD • D
Sponsored 12/17/2025
Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4]
GA • D
Sponsored 12/17/2025
Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5]
PA • D
Sponsored 12/17/2025
Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46]
CA • D
Sponsored 12/17/2025
Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-6]
GA • D
Sponsored 1/13/2026
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.gov