MARSHALS Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3607
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Law
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-05-23: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2025-12-05T22:54:31Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The MARSHALS Act (H.R. 3607) aims to transfer the United States Marshals Service (USMS) from the Department of Justice in the executive branch to the judicial branch of the U.S. government. This shift is intended to enhance the independence and security of the federal judiciary by placing the USMS under judicial oversight, reducing potential executive influence over court operations and protections.
Key Provisions
- Establishment and Leadership: Creates the USMS as a bureau within the judicial branch, headed by a Director appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States (in consultation with a new oversight Board). The Director can be removed by the Board. The Board consists of the Chief Justice, representatives from the Judicial Conference of the United States (a policy-making body for the federal courts), and the Director as a non-voting member. The Board sets goals for the USMS's efficiency and operations.
- Appointment of Marshals: United States Marshals are appointed by the Chief Justice (in consultation with the Board) for four-year terms, one per judicial district (with exceptions for smaller districts like the Northern Mariana Islands). Vacancies are filled by the Chief Justice to complete the term. Marshals serve under the Director and continue in office until a successor is appointed.
- Powers and Duties:
- Authorizes the USMS to provide personal protection for federal judges, court officers, witnesses, and others threatened when criminal intimidation affects judicial processes.
- Allows assistance to the Department of Justice (DOJ) upon request and Director approval, including fugitive investigations (domestic and international), issuing subpoenas for unregistered sex offender investigations, and helping state, local, or federal agencies locate missing children.
- Prohibits USMS personnel from practicing law and outlines reemployment rights for former marshals.
- Oath, Expenses, and Fees: Requires marshals to take an oath of office; covers operational expenses and fee collection, with accounting to the judiciary.
- Technical Updates: Redesignates chapters in U.S. legal code (title 28), updates tables of contents, and amends related laws (e.g., Homeland Security Act and Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act) to reflect the transfer and adjust references to the Attorney General's role.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Branch Transfer: Moves the USMS from the executive branch (under the Attorney General) to the judicial branch by redesignating and relocating Chapter 59 of title 28, United States Code, from Part II (executive departments) to Part III (courts).
- Oversight Shift: Replaces Attorney General authority with Chief Justice and Board control over appointments, removals, vacancies, and approvals for assistance to other agencies. Removes or modifies sections allowing direct executive direction (e.g., striking Attorney General-directed operations).
- Limited Assistance Role: Narrows USMS involvement in non-judicial tasks to those requested by the DOJ and approved by the Director, emphasizing judicial priorities like protection over broad executive law enforcement.
- Conforming Amendments: Updates definitions (e.g., simplifying references to marshals in court officer laws) and integrates USMS protections into broader security frameworks, such as allowing judicial missions in federal air marshal coordination.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The DOJ loses direct control over the USMS, potentially streamlining judicial security but requiring coordination for joint operations like fugitive hunts. The judiciary gains dedicated resources for court protection, which could improve operational efficiency but increase its administrative burden.
- On Citizens: Enhances security for participants in federal court proceedings (e.g., witnesses and judges facing threats), potentially reducing intimidation in trials. Indirectly supports public safety through targeted USMS help on issues like missing children or sex offender tracking, though these remain secondary to judicial duties.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, but the USMS's role in international fugitive investigations (now requiring Director approval) could affect cooperation with foreign law enforcement if judicial priorities delay executive requests.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Judiciary: Primary beneficiaries, including judges, court staff, and the Judicial Conference, who gain independent control over security and operations.
- Department of Justice and Executive Branch: Loses oversight of the USMS, affecting coordination on law enforcement tasks; the Attorney General's role is reduced to requesting assistance.
- Law Enforcement Agencies: State, local, and federal entities (e.g., FBI) may experience changes in USMS support for fugitives, missing persons, or sex offender cases, depending on judicial approvals.
- Congress: As the bill's introducers (Reps. Swalwell, Raskin, and Johnson) and referring committee (House Judiciary), they influence implementation; future funding and oversight could shift toward judicial appropriations.
- General Public: Court users, witnesses, and victims of related crimes (e.g., sex offenses or child abductions) may see improved protections or assistance.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Strengthens judicial autonomy by codifying USMS as a judicial entity, potentially clarifying jurisdictional lines in protection cases. Amendments ensure compliance with existing laws on subpoenas and security, but could lead to disputes over approval processes for inter-agency aid.
- Constitutional Implications: Aligns with separation of powers by insulating judicial security from executive influence, echoing Article III's emphasis on an independent judiciary. However, it may raise questions about the Chief Justice's expanded administrative role in appointments and oversight, traditionally a congressional or executive function.
- Political Implications: The transfer could reduce politicization of marshals' duties (e.g., in high-profile cases), promoting neutrality. As a bipartisan bill introduced in a divided Congress, it highlights debates on branch independence amid concerns over executive overreach in justice matters, though implementation might face resistance from executive agencies accustomed to control.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (44)
Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Riley, Josh [D-NY-19], Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9], Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5], Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2], Rep. García, Jesús G. "Chuy" [D-IL-4], Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7], Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2], Rep. Crockett, Jasmine [D-TX-30], Rep. Balint, Becca [D-VT-At Large], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-6], Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12], Rep. Moskowitz, Jared [D-FL-23], Rep. Correa, J. Luis [D-CA-46], Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-18], Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36], Rep. Ramirez, Delia C. [D-IL-3], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4], Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10], Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4], Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2], Rep. Simon, Lateefah [D-CA-12], Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9], Rep. Lynch, Stephen F. [D-MA-8], Rep. Deluzio, Christopher R. [D-PA-17], Rep. McClain Delaney, April [D-MD-6], Rep. Min, Dave [D-CA-47], Rep. McBride, Sarah [D-DE-At Large], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13], Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9], Rep. Larson, John B. [D-CT-1], Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1], Rep. Lee, Summer L. [D-PA-12], Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Alexandria [D-NY-14], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1], Rep. Latimer, George [D-NY-16]
Recent Actions
- 2025-05-23: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-05-23: Introduced in House
- 2025-05-23: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Maintaining Authority and Restoring Security to Halt the Abuse of Law — issued 2025-05-23 — PDF (8 pages)