To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes in the United States

To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes

Act Details

To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes was a proposal (now, a piece of legislation) introduced on 2011-03-14 in the House of Commons and Senate respectively of the 112 United States Congress by John Conyers in relation with: Government ethics and transparency, public corruption, Government information and archives, Judges, Law, Right of privacy.

House Judiciary (HSJU)
sub Subcommittee on Courts Commercial and Administrative Law (sub 03)

Sponsor

John Conyers, member of the US congress
John Conyers, Democrat, Representative from Michigan, district 14

The proposal had the following cosponsors:

Steve Cohen, Representative, from Tennessee, district 9
Henry Johnson, Representative, from Georgia, district 4

Act Overview

Number: 1059 (3)
Official Title as Introduced: To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes (4)
Date First Introduced: 2011-03-14
Sponsor Name: Henry Johnson
Assignment Process: See Committe Assignments (5)
Latest Major Activity/Action: Enacted
Date Enacted (signed, in general (6), by President): 2012-01-03
Type: hr (7)
Main Topic: Law
Related Bills: (8)
Summary of To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes: Govtrack. Authored by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the Library of Congress.
Primary Source: Congress Website

Text of the To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes

(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on November 15 2011. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Revises the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to extend until December 31 2017 the Judicial Conference’s authority to redact financial disclosure reports filed by a judicial officer or employee if it finds that revealing personal and sensitive information could endanger that individual or a family member of that individual.

Bill Notes

[Note 1] An Act (like To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes) or a resolution cannot become a law in the United States until it has been approved (passed) in identical form by both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as signed by the President (but see (5)). If the two bodys of the Congress versions of a bill are not identical, one of the bodies might decide to take a further vote to adopt the bill (see more about the Congress process here). An Act may be pass in identical form with or without amendments and with or without conference. (see more about Enrollment).
[Note 2] Proposals are referred to committees for preliminary consideration, then debated, amended, and passed (or rejected) by the full House or Senate. To prevent endless shuttling of bills between the House and Senate, bills like To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes are referred to joint committees made up of members of both houses.
[Note 3] For more information regarding this legislative proposal, go to THOMAS, select “Bill Number,” search on (To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes)
[Note 4] To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes. The current official title of a bill is always present, assigned at introduction (for example, in this case, on 2011-03-14) and can be revised any time. This type of titles are sentences.
[Note 5] The Act is referred to the appropriate committee by the Speaker of any of the two Houses. Bills are placed on the calendar of the committee to which they have been assigned. See Assignment Process.
[Note 6] Regarding exceptions to President´s approval, a bill that is not signed (returned unsigned) by the President can still become law if at lest two thirds of each of the two bodys of the Congress votes to pass it, which is an infrequent case. See also Presidential Veto.
[Note 7] Legislative Proposal types can be: hr, hres, hjres, hconres, s, sres, sjres, sconres. An Act originating in the Senate is designated by the letter “S”, and a bill originating from the House of Representatives begins with “H.R.”, followed, in both cases, by its individual number which it retains throughout all its parliamentary process.
[Note 8] For information regarding related bill/s to To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes, go to THOMAS.

Analysis

No analysis (criticism, advocacy, etc.) about To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes submitted yet.

Government ethics and transparency, public corruption
Government information and archives
Judges
Law
Right of privacy

To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes

To protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes in the United States