119-HR-8485 Journalist Public Summary
119 · HR 8485 No Rogue Jurors Act
H.R. 8485 (“No Rogue Jurors Act”) would bar federal funding to any organization that encourages people to serve on federal or D.C. juries with the intent to disregard the law or evidence; it’s pitched as protecting the integrity of trials, while critics are likely to see free‑speech and civil‑liberties concerns. As of April 23, 2026, it’s newly introduced and sits in the House Oversight Committee.
Headline Summary
A bill to stop federal dollars from going to groups that encourage jury nullification in federal or D.C. courts.
What It Does
H.R. 8485 — the “No Rogue Jurors Act” — would prohibit federal funds (grants, contracts, awards, or similar assistance) from going to any organization, school, or entity that trains, produces materials, or does outreach aimed at getting people to serve on juries with the intent to vote against the law or evidence, including urging acquittal even when all elements of the offense are proven (“jury nullification”). The restriction applies to federal and District of Columbia court proceedings and references efforts branded as “Equity & Root Cause Jury Training” or substantially similar language.
Who’s For It
- Sponsor: Rep. Julia Letlow (R‑LA).
- Supporters’ argument (in brief): Public money shouldn’t underwrite programs that tell would‑be jurors to ignore the law or facts; doing so risks mistrials, uneven justice, and lower public confidence in courts.
Who’s Against It
- No formal opposition listed yet; the bill was just introduced.
- Likely critics: civil‑liberties groups, some criminal‑justice reform advocates, and parts of the defense bar, who may argue it chills protected speech, targets a viewpoint, or could be applied too broadly to academic or community education about juries.
What’s Next
As of April 23, 2026, the bill has been introduced and referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Next steps typically include potential hearings or a committee markup, followed by a committee vote; only then could it move to the full House, and later the Senate, for consideration.
Discussion