# H.R. 8365 (119th): Monitor Accountability Act

Monitor Accountability Act This bill requires the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to establish conditions on the appointment of monitors to oversee state and local governmental entities. A monitor is an independent official appointed to oversee corrective reforms as part of a civil settlement agreement or consent decree, such as to remedy a pattern or practice of unconstitutional policing. Among the conditions, this bill requires notice and an opportunity for public comment prior to the appointment of a monitor, limits an individual to one monitor appointment at a time, sets a five-year term limit for monitors, and requires a public accounting of the fees charged and services provided by the monitor. It also caps fees and explicitly authorizes the use of pro bono services. In 2021, the Department of Justice began implementing a set of principles and specific recommendations regarding the use of monitors in civil settlement agreements and consent decrees involving state and local governmental entities, including recommendations relating to term limits, capping fees, and public accountability.

## How this bill is scored

Tier: no Tier 1 record. A bill with no record cannot newly become Tier 1.
Lane: accountability. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Lane: government_accountability. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Lane: government_overreach. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Lane: judicial_administration. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Lane: policing_reform. Category: not stored. Lane tag: not stored.
Tier 1 sign-off: no record. A bill with no record cannot newly become Tier 1.
Stored polarity: mixed. Only tags the rules mark scoreable on a mixed bill are scored. A yea can draw a penalty or a credit according to the tag. A nay on a tag scored as good can draw a penalty.
Roll 172: On Motion to Recommit. Vote type: recommit.
Roll 173: On Passage. Vote type: final_passage.
Polarity rationale: Reviewed enrichment (llm_import) polarity: The bill combines ordinary prudential goods (public notice, term limits, fee caps, public accounting, pro bono options) with a real concern that limiting monitors could weaken remedies for unconstitutional policing. It does not directly advance a named moral harm, nor does it clearly defend justice against one, so mixed is the prudent classification.
Theological note: The bill concerns the oversight of remedies for unconstitutional policing and the stewardship of public money and institutional power. Scripture's call to justice and to restraint of abuse is relevant, as is the duty to deal honestly with public funds. Its fee caps and public accounting bear on general equity and good stewardship, while its effect on the enforcement of constitutional remedies raises a prudential question about whether accountability is strengthened or weakened.

## Recorded votes

Roll 172: On Motion to Recommit. Yea 210 · Nay 213 · Other 7.
Roll 173: On Passage. Yea 219 · Nay 204 · Other 7.

HTML: https://justmeasure.org/bill/hr-8365-119/