PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 1, 2011
Supreme Court Transparency and Disclosure Act of 2011 - Applies to Supreme Court justices the same code of conduct that applies to U.S. circuit and district judges.
Directs the U.S. Judicial Conference to establish procedures under which complaints alleging that a justice violated such code of conduct may be filed with and investigated by the Conference.
Requires a justice to publicly disclose the reasons for: (1) disqualifying himself or herself, under specified provisions of the federal judicial code, from any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned; or (2) denying a party's motion for such disqualification.
Directs the Conference to establish a process in which other justices or federal judges decide whether a justice should be disqualified when a party who is denied such a motion seeks further review.
People & committees
Rep. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT-5] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
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.862 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.862 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.862 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.862 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.