119-HR-8992 Journalist Public Summary

Public Summary — H.R. 8992 (SCCOTUS Act)

Headline Summary: A bill to move the first cut of Supreme Court case selection to a rotating panel of appeals-court judges and publish basic stats about those choices.

What It Does: H.R. 8992 (the “SCCOTUS Act”) would set up a 13‑judge Supreme Court Certification Panel—one judge from each federal appeals court, chosen at random each Supreme Court term—to review every request asking the Court to hear a case (a “cert petition”). Four panel votes would be needed to grant review, mirroring today’s basic threshold. Granted cases would then go straight onto the Supreme Court’s docket. The panel would issue brief reasons for grants, provide an annual public report with topline numbers, follow existing ethics and recusal rules, and operate under procedures written by the Judicial Conference within one year of enactment.

• Creates a rotating 13‑judge panel drawn from the federal courts of appeals each term.
• Panel reviews all cert petitions; 4 votes required to grant review.
• Brief written reasons for grants; standardized criteria aligned with existing practice.
• Annual public report with counts of petitions reviewed, granted, and denied (without revealing confidential deliberations).
• Standard ethics/recusal rules; judges who handled a case below can’t review its petition.
• Random selection and public recordkeeping run by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

Why It Matters: The bill would change who controls the Supreme Court’s gatekeeping. Supporters say this could make case selection more transparent and predictable and help focus the Court on issues of broad national importance. Critics worry it could weaken the Court’s independence, add delay, or invite constitutional challenges by shifting a core internal function to a lower‑court panel.

Who’s For It:

• Sponsor: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D‑MD).
• Backers who favor more transparency and formal criteria in Supreme Court case selection.
• Some court‑reform and good‑governance advocates who want clearer public reporting about which cases get heard and why.

Who’s Against It:

• Opponents who argue the Supreme Court—not outside judges—should control its own docket to preserve judicial independence.
• Skeptics who see potential constitutional problems with Congress relocating this gatekeeping role.
• Those concerned the new layer could slow urgent cases or introduce inconsistency across rotating panels.

What’s Next: The bill was introduced on May 21, 2026 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee the same day. As of June 2, 2026, it awaits committee consideration before any possible House vote, Senate action, and the President’s signature.