Read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S12453-12458)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 3, 2003
Independent Counsel Reform Act of 2003 - Rewrites the Independent Counsel (IC) statute to: (1) limit application of the statute to the President, Vice President, Level I positions of the Executive Schedule (Cabinet members, the Commissioner of Social Security, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board), and the President's Chief of Staff; (2) expand to 120 days the period of time in which the Attorney General must conduct a preliminary investigation; (3) authorize the Attorney General to convene grand juries and issue subpoenas in a preliminary investigation; (4) heighten the evidentiary threshold for seeking appointment of an IC from "reasonable" to "substantial" grounds; (5) require the IC to serve on a full-time basis; (6) limit the scope of inquiry to matters "directly" related to the IC's prosecutorial jurisdiction; (7) delete provisions authorizing expansion of the IC's prosecutorial jurisdiction; (8) require the IC to submit a budget for each year to the Attorney General and the General Accounting Office; (9) require the courts of the United States to expedite consideration and review of matters relating to an IC's investigation and prosecution; (10) delete the requirement directing an IC to advise the House of Representatives of any information that may support impeachment; and (11) terminate an IC's term at the end of two years after appointment, with the possibility of an extension for good cause or to compensate for dilatory tactics. Amends the Federal judicial code to: (1) extend to three years the period of service of judges assigned to the division of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that appoints ICs; and (2) require the Chief Justice to assign three judges for such division by a lottery of all circuit court judges.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 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 S.1712 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 S.1712 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 S.1712 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 S.1712 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.