PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 19, 1999
Federal Prosecutor Ethics Act - Amends the Federal judicial code to replace provisions regarding ethical standards for attorneys for the Government with ethical standards for Federal prosecutors. Subjects a Federal prosecutor (defined as an attorney employed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) who is directly engaged in the prosecution of violations of Federal civil or criminal law) to all laws and rules governing ethical conduct of attorneys of the State in which such prosecutor is licensed as an attorney, except to the extent such law or rule is inconsistent with Federal law or interferes with the effectuation of Federal law or policy, including the investigation of violations of Federal law. Directs the Attorney General to establish by rule that it shall be punishable conduct for any DOJ officer or employee, in the discharge of his or her official duties, to intentionally: (1) seek the indictment of any person in the absence of a reasonable belief of probable cause; (2) fail to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense; (3) mislead a court as to the guilt of any person by knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law; (4) offer evidence known to be false; (5) alter evidence; (6) attempt to corruptly influence or color a witness's testimony with intent to encourage untruthful testimony; (7) violate a criminal defendant's right to discovery; (8) offer or provide sexual activities to any Government witness or potential witness in exchange for his or her testimony; or (9) improperly disseminate confidential, non-public information to any person during an investigation or trial. Requires the Attorney General to: (1) establish a range of penalties for engaging in such prohibited conduct, including reprimand, demotion, dismissal, suspension from employment, referral of ethical charges to the bar, and referral of evidence related to the conduct to a grand jury; and (2) report annually to specified congressional committees on the activities and operations of DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility. Establishes a Commission on Federal Prosecutorial Conduct. Sets forth reporting requirements. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S704-706)
Introduced in Senate
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 10, 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 S.250 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 S.250 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 S.250 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 S.250 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.