Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States providing that there is no immunity from criminal prosecution for an act on the grounds that such act was within the constitutional authority or official duties of an individual, and providing that the President may not grant a pardon to himself or herself.

Bill Number

H.J.Res. 108

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Crime and Law Enforcement

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-07-22: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-06-30T08:06:24Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 108) proposes a constitutional amendment to eliminate legal protections that shield high-level U.S. government officials from criminal prosecution for actions taken as part of their official roles. It also aims to prevent the President from issuing pardons to themselves, promoting greater accountability for violations of law.

Key Provisions

• Section 1: Prohibits immunity from criminal prosecution for any U.S. officer (including the President, Vice President, Senators, and Representatives) for breaking valid federal laws or state laws (unless the act was explicitly allowed by federal law). This applies even if the act was part of their constitutional authority or official duties. An exception exists for Senators and Representatives when they are acting under the Speech or Debate Clause (a constitutional protection for legislative speech and debate, as outlined in Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution).
• Section 2: Bars the President from granting a reprieve or pardon (a legal forgiveness of a federal crime) to themselves for offenses against the United States.
• Section 3: The amendment would take effect automatically upon ratification (self-executing) and allows Congress to pass laws to help enforce it.

The amendment requires approval by two-thirds of both the House and Senate, followed by ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures to become part of the Constitution.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Overturns Immunity Doctrines: This would directly challenge Supreme Court rulings, such as the 2024 decision in Trump v. United States, which granted presidents absolute immunity for "core" official acts and presumptive immunity for other official duties. The amendment removes these shields, making officials prosecutable like private citizens for criminal acts, regardless of their official context.
• Limits Presidential Pardon Power: While the Constitution (Article II, Section 2) currently allows the President broad pardon authority without explicit self-pardon restrictions, this amendment explicitly forbids self-pardons, closing a debated loophole.
• Broadens Accountability: Expands prosecutorial reach to include state laws (with the federal authorization exception), which is not currently limited in the same way for federal officials.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Federal and state law enforcement (e.g., Department of Justice, state attorneys general) could pursue more cases against officials without immunity barriers, potentially increasing investigations but straining resources. Congress might need to pass implementing laws, affecting legislative priorities.
• On Citizens: Enhances public trust in government by ensuring leaders face consequences for crimes, potentially deterring official misconduct. However, it could lead to more politically motivated prosecutions, affecting perceptions of fairness.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct effects, though it might strengthen the U.S. image as a nation upholding the rule of law, influencing diplomatic credibility on issues like human rights or anti-corruption efforts.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Government Officials: Presidents, Vice Presidents, Senators, and Representatives would lose key legal protections, increasing personal legal risks.
• Prosecutors and Judiciary: Federal and state prosecutors gain clearer authority to charge officials; courts would handle more such cases without immunity defenses.
• Citizens and Advocacy Groups: The public, especially those concerned with accountability (e.g., civil rights organizations, anti-corruption watchdogs), benefits from reduced elite impunity; political opponents could use it to target rivals.
• Congress: As the body proposing and potentially implementing the amendment, it faces internal divisions, given the list of over 100 cosponsors (mostly Democrats) indicates partisan support.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: Shifts the balance in criminal law by prioritizing accountability over official immunity, potentially leading to more lawsuits testing the amendment's scope (e.g., what counts as "official duties"). The self-executing nature means it applies immediately upon ratification, without needing new laws.
• Constitutional Implications: Alters the separation of powers by limiting executive (presidential) and legislative privileges, reinforcing the principle that no one is above the law. It could invite debates on federalism, as it touches on state prosecutions of federal officials.
• Political Implications: As a proposed amendment introduced in July 2025 by a large bipartisan but predominantly Democratic group, it reflects ongoing debates over executive power (e.g., post-2020 election controversies). Ratification would require broad consensus, which is rare and politically charged, potentially deepening partisan divides or influencing future elections by reshaping accountability norms.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Morelle, Joseph D. [D-NY-25]

Cosponsors (180)

Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12], Rep. Amo, Gabe [D-RI-1], Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Rep. Balint, Becca [D-VT-At Large], Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44], Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1], Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1], Rep. Boyle, Brendan F. [D-PA-2], Rep. Brown, Shontel M. [D-OH-11], Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26], Rep. Budzinski, Nikki [D-IL-13], Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7], Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2], Rep. Casar, Greg [D-TX-35], Rep. Casten, Sean [D-IL-6], Rep. Castor, Kathy [D-FL-14], Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20], Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick, Sheila [D-FL-20], Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-28], Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9], Rep. Cleaver, Emanuel [D-MO-5], Rep. Clyburn, James E. [D-SC-6], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-21], Rep. Courtney, Joe [D-CT-2], Rep. Craig, Angie [D-MN-2], Rep. Crockett, Jasmine [D-TX-30], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. DeGette, Diana [D-CO-1], Rep. DeLauro, Rosa L. [D-CT-3], Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1], Rep. Deluzio, Christopher R. [D-PA-17], Rep. DeSaulnier, Mark [D-CA-10], Rep. Dexter, Maxine [D-OR-3], Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6], Rep. Doggett, Lloyd [D-TX-37], Rep. Escobar, Veronica [D-TX-16], Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13], Rep. Evans, Dwight [D-PA-3], Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7], Rep. Foster, Bill [D-IL-11], Rep. Friedman, Laura [D-CA-30], Rep. Frost, Maxwell [D-FL-10], Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8], Rep. Garcia, Robert [D-CA-42], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Gomez, Jimmy [D-CA-34], Rep. Green, Al [D-TX-9] and 130 more

Recent Actions

• 2025-07-22: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-07-22: Introduced in House
• 2025-07-22: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States providing that there is no immunity from criminal prosecution for an act on the grounds that such act was within the constitutional authority or official duties of an individual, and providing that the President may not grant a pardon to himself or herself. — issued 2025-07-22 — PDF (3 pages)