PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

United States · Bill · S

S. 2966 (114th)

District of Columbia Judicial Financial Transparency Act

openUnited States· United States Congress· EN

Introduced

23 May 2016

Last action

Status

Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 645.

Sponsors

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

5 December 2025

Summary

District of Columbia Judicial Financial Transparency Act This bill amends the District of Columbia Code to revise the financial disclosure requirements for District of Columbia judges. The revisions establish new dollar thresholds and requirements for reporting to the District of Columbia Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure the financial interests of the judges and specified family members with respect to: income; dividends, rents, interest, and capital gains; liabilities; gifts; real and personal property; honoraria; expense accounts or reimbursements for expenses; and waivers or partial waivers of fees or charges. The financial disclosure reports must be available for public inspection and copying, unless revealing personal and sensitive information could endanger the judge or a family member. A report may be redacted only: (1) to the extent necessary to protect the individual or family member, and (2) as long as the danger to the individual exists. The Probate Divisions of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia may use magistrate judges. DC courts may accept payment of fines, fees, escrow payments, restitution, bonds, and other payments by credit card or electronic funds transfer. The executive officer of the courts may contract with a bank or credit card vendor, or other third party provider, to accept such payments, making every effort to find the lowest cost vendor among them. The maximum amount in controversy for cases under the Small Claims and Conciliation Branch of DC Superior Court shall increase from $5,000 to $10,000. The chief judge of the Superior Court or of the Court of Appeals, as appropriate, may delegate to an active or senior judge the authority to approve any compensation for court-appointed attorneys exceeding the usual maximum.

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

6 official files

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.