Administrative Law Judge Conference of the United States Act
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 22, 1998
Administrative Law Judge Conference of the United States Act - Establishes the Administrative Law Judge Conference of the United States to consist of all administrative law judges. Makes the chief administrative law judge the chief administrative officer and presiding judge of the Conference. Requires the chief judge to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and to have served as an administrative law judge for at least five years before the date of appointment. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) the chief judge's term of office, rate of pay, and service as an administrative law judge after expiration of that term; and (2) powers of the chief judge (including to enhance the administrative law process, develop training programs, and encourage the efficient use of administrative law judges through temporary reassignment based upon workload). Transfers all administrative law judge functions currently performed by the Office of Administrative Law Judges of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management to the Conference. Directs that the chief judge assign administrative law judges to agencies for the adjudication of agency cases. Makes each agency responsible for providing all administrative law judge budget, resources, and support requirements, for maintaining administrative law judge finance records, and for appointing the chief administrative law judge for the agency. Declares that the advisory body on policy of the Conference shall be the Council of the Administrative Law Judge Conference of the United States, with the chief judge presiding over the Council. Sets forth provisions regarding Council membership, responsibilities, public member compensation, administrative law judge duties, case referrals, and application of agency policy. Directs the chief judge, upon the Council's recommendation and after providing notice and a period for comment, to adopt and issue rules of judicial conduct for administrative law judges. Prohibits an administrative law judge from being removed, suspended, reprimanded, or disciplined except for misconduct or neglect, or for physical or mental disability. Requires the rules of the chief judge to contain a Complaints Resolution Board which consists of both administrative law judges and attorneys, at a specified rate of compensation. Sets forth complaint and transition procedures. Authorizes appropriations for FY 1999 for the Conference.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.3961 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.3961 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.3961 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.3961 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.