PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 6, 2007
Death Penalty Reform Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code to modify substantive law and procedures relating to the death penalty.
Adds certain crimes that result in death, including obstruction of justice, as aggravating factors in death penalty deliberations.
Defines "mentally retarded" for death penalty purposes. Requires a defendant to give notice to the government of any mitigating factors, including mental retardation, which the defendant intends to present in a death penalty proceeding. Grants the government the right to an independent mental health examination of a defendant claiming mental retardation.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Grants the Attorney General regulatory authority over the implementation of the death penalty. Repeals the prohibition against executing a person who is mentally retarded. Grants the government an unlimited right to rehearings of a finding of mental incapacity in death penalty cases.
Requires a court in a death penalty case to: (1) assign a second attorney for the defendant when the government files a notice of intent to seek a sentence of death (currently, assignment is required upon indictment); and (2) permit the government to strike for cause jurors who oppose the death penalty.
Modifies criteria relating to mitigating and aggravating factors in death penalty cases.
Authorizes a court in the sentencing phase of a death penalty case to impanel a jury of less than 12 members upon a finding of good cause.
Amends the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to increase the number of alternative jurors and peremptory challenges to such jurors in criminal proceedings.
People & committees
Rep. Gohmert, Louie [R-TX-1] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 14, 2025. 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.851 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.851 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.851 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.851 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.