PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 12 - 11.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 24, 2026
Restoring Executive Branch Authorities to Oversee Offices of the United States Attorneys Act of 2026
This bill expands the authority of the executive branch to appoint interim U.S. Attorneys.
Current law generally requires U.S. Attorneys to be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for four-year terms. However, if a position becomes vacant, then current law allows the Attorney General to appoint an interim U.S. Attorney for a term of up to 120 days. Further, if the 120-day term of an interim U.S. Attorney expires without a permanent, Senate-confirmed nominee, then the U.S. district court for the relevant judicial district may appoint a U.S. Attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled.
This bill eliminates the authority for U.S. district courts to appoint U.S. Attorneys to fill a vacancy after the 120-day term of an interim U.S. Attorney expires.
Additionally, the bill authorizes the Attorney General to make multiple interim appointments for 120-day terms.
People & committees
Rep. Schmidt, Derek [R-KS-2] · R–KS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 12 - 11.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 27, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.8065 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.
Examine H.R.8065 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.
Examine H.R.8065 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.
Examine H.R.8065 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.