This part adds a new law to the crime code. It lets a person who was forced into crime ask a judge to wipe out a guilty ruling. It also lets them ask to erase an arrest record. A judge can cut jail time too. The papers stay sealed and cost nothing to file.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Chapter 237 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:”
Subsection (a) carries the whole substance of the section. It adds a new section at the end of chapter 237 of title 18, United States Code, numbered 3771A and headed "Motion to vacate; expungement; mitigating factors". Everything recorded in the proposals that follow is text this Act inserts there.
What the document actually says
“Chapter 237 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:”
That sentence, in plain words
A part of the law books is changed. A new part is put at the end.
What this is about
Title 18 holds the crime laws. The new part is number 3771A. It sets out how a court can wipe out a record.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “means”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“the term `level A offense' means a Federal offense that is not a violent crime;”
The new section sorts Federal offenses into two classes. A level A offense is a Federal offense that is not a violent crime. A level B offense is a Federal offense that is a violent crime, but it does not include a violent crime of which a child was a victim. The definitions section takes "violent crime" from the meaning given to "crime of violence" in section 16(a) of title 18, and "child" means an individual who has not attained 18 years of age. Which relief is available turns on which class the offense falls into.
What the document actually says
“the term `level A offense' means a Federal offense that is not a violent crime;”
That sentence, in plain words
A level A crime is a crime under federal law. It is one that is not violent.
What this is about
The law sorts crimes into two piles. Level A crimes are not violent. Level B crimes are violent. A violent crime that hurt a child sits in neither pile.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “means”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“the term `victim of trafficking' has the meaning given that term in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102); and”
The term that the whole section turns on is not defined here. It is given the meaning it carries in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, codified at 22 U.S.C. 7102. That statute is not indexed on this site, so nothing is recorded here about what the definition contains. Section 7 of this Act amends two paragraph cross references within that same section 103.
What the document actually says
“the term `victim of trafficking' has the meaning given that term in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102); and”
That sentence, in plain words
The word victim has the same meaning as in a law from the year 2000.
What this is about
That older law is about people who are forced to work or have sex. The word here means the same thing. This law does not spell it out again.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: persons convicted of level A offenses, United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“A person convicted of any level A offense (or an attorney representing such a person) may move the court that imposed the sentence for the level A offense to vacate the judgment of conviction if the level A offense was committed as a direct result of the person having been a victim of trafficking.”
The first of the three motions the new section creates. A person convicted of a level A offense, or an attorney representing that person, may move to vacate the judgment of conviction. The motion goes to the court that imposed the sentence. The ground is that the offense was committed as a direct result of the person having been a victim of trafficking.
What the document actually says
“A person convicted of any level A offense (or an attorney representing such a person) may move the court that imposed the sentence for the level A offense to vacate the judgment of conviction if the level A offense was committed as a direct result of the person having been a victim of trafficking.”
That sentence, in plain words
A person found guilty of a level A crime can ask a judge to wipe out that ruling. Their lawyer can ask too. They must show the crime came from being forced.
What this is about
The ask goes to the court that gave the sentence. The crime must not be a violent one. Level A crimes are the ones that are not violent.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: persons arrested for level A offenses, United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“A person arrested for any level A offense (or an attorney representing such a person) may move the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where the person was arrested to expunge all records of the arrest”
The second motion. A person arrested for a level A offense, or an attorney representing that person, may move to expunge all records of the arrest. The motion goes to the district court for the district and division embracing the place where the arrest happened. The ground is that the conduct or alleged conduct that resulted in the arrest was directly related to the person having been a victim of trafficking. No conviction is required for this motion.
What the document actually says
“A person arrested for any level A offense (or an attorney representing such a person) may move the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where the person was arrested to expunge all records of the arrest”
That sentence, in plain words
A person held for a level A crime can ask a court to erase all records of the arrest. Their lawyer can ask too.
What this is about
The ask goes to the court for the place where the arrest took place. An arrest leaves a record even with no trial. This lets that record be erased.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: persons arrested for level B offenses, United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“A person arrested for any level B offense (or an attorney representing such a person) may move the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where the person was arrested to expunge all records of the arrest if--”
The third motion, and the only one that reaches a violent crime. It is available on two conditions read together. The conduct or alleged conduct that resulted in the arrest must have been directly related to the movant having been a victim of trafficking. And the level B charge must have ended without a standing conviction: the movant was acquitted, or the Government did not pursue or moved to dismiss the charges, or the charge was reduced to a level A offense which itself ended in acquittal, dismissal, non pursuit or a vacated conviction. No motion to vacate a conviction of a level B offense is created.
What the document actually says
“A person arrested for any level B offense (or an attorney representing such a person) may move the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where the person was arrested to expunge all records of the arrest if--”
That sentence, in plain words
A person held for a level B crime can ask a court to erase all records of the arrest. Their lawyer can ask too. Some tests must be met.
What this is about
Level B crimes are violent, so the tests are harder. The arrest must be tied to being forced. And the case must have ended with no guilty ruling left standing.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: movants under section 3771AHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“A motion described in paragraph (1) shall-- ``(A) be in writing; ``(B) describe any supporting evidence; ``(C) state the offense; and ``(D) include copies of any documents showing that the movant is entitled to relief under this section.”
Four requirements apply to all three motions. The motion must be in writing, must describe any supporting evidence, must state the offense, and must include copies of any documents showing that the movant is entitled to relief under the section.
What the document actually says
“A motion described in paragraph (1) shall-- ``(A) be in writing; ``(B) describe any supporting evidence; ``(C) state the offense; and ``(D) include copies of any documents showing that the movant is entitled to relief under this section.”
That sentence, in plain words
The ask must be on paper. It must list the proof. It must name the crime. It must come with copies of papers that show the right to help.
What this is about
This is a short list of what goes in the ask. A court can turn down an ask that leaves something out. But it must then give time to fix it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courts, United States attorneysHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“If the Government files a motion described in clause (i), not later than 15 days after the date on which the motion is filed, the court shall hold a hearing on the motion.”
The Government has 30 days from the filing of a motion under paragraph (1) to file a motion in opposition. If it does, the court is required to hold a hearing within 15 days of that opposition. If the Government does not oppose, a hearing becomes discretionary: the court may hold one, and if it does, not later than 45 days after the motion was filed.
What the document actually says
“If the Government files a motion described in clause (i), not later than 15 days after the date on which the motion is filed, the court shall hold a hearing on the motion.”
That sentence, in plain words
If the government says no, the court must hold a hearing. That hearing comes within 15 days.
What this is about
The government has 30 days to file its own paper saying no. If it files nothing, the court can still hold a hearing. That one comes within 45 days.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The court may grant a motion under paragraph (1)(A) if, after notice to the Government and an opportunity to be heard, the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that-- ``(i) the movant was convicted of a level A offense; and ``(ii) the participation in the level A offense by the movant was a direct result of the movant having been a victim of trafficking.”
The same structure governs all three motions: notice to the Government, an opportunity to be heard, and findings by a preponderance of the evidence. For a motion to vacate, the court must find the movant was convicted of a level A offense and that participation in it was a direct result of having been a victim of trafficking. For expunging a level A arrest, the court must find the arrest was for a level A offense and the conduct was directly related to having been a victim of trafficking. For expunging a level B arrest, the court must find the same link plus one of the outcomes listed in the motion provision. In each case the court may grant the motion; it is not directed to.
What the document actually says
“The court may grant a motion under paragraph (1)(A) if, after notice to the Government and an opportunity to be heard, the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that-- ``(i) the movant was convicted of a level A offense; and ``(ii) the participation in the level A offense by the movant was a direct result of the movant having been a victim of trafficking.”
That sentence, in plain words
The judge can say yes to the ask. First the government gets word and a chance to speak. The judge must find two things are more likely true than not.
What this is about
The two things are that the person was found guilty, and that they took part because they were forced. A like test is used for erasing arrests. The word can matters here. The judge is allowed to say yes but is not told to.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“in determining whether the movant is a victim of trafficking, the court-- ``(i) shall consider an affidavit or sworn testimony of an anti-human trafficking service provider or clinician; and”
In deciding whether the movant is a victim of trafficking, the court is required to consider an affidavit or sworn testimony from an anti-human trafficking service provider or a clinician. It may also consider any other supporting evidence it determines is of sufficient credibility and probative value, and the section names one example: sworn testimony from a law enforcement officer detailing the role of the movant in coercing other victims of trafficking into committing criminal offenses.
What the document actually says
“in determining whether the movant is a victim of trafficking, the court-- ``(i) shall consider an affidavit or sworn testimony of an anti-human trafficking service provider or clinician; and”
That sentence, in plain words
The judge must look at a sworn paper from a helper who works with people who were forced. A doctor or nurse counts too.
What this is about
The judge can also look at other proof. That includes sworn words from a police officer. The judge decides which proof is worth trusting.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The affidavit or sworn testimony described in subparagraph (A)(i) shall be sufficient evidence to vacate a conviction or expunge an arrest under this section if the court determines that-- ``(i) the affidavit or sworn testimony is credible; and ``(ii) no other evidence is readily available.”
The affidavit or sworn testimony of a service provider or clinician is declared sufficient evidence, on its own, to vacate a conviction or expunge an arrest, on two findings: that it is credible, and that no other evidence is readily available.
What the document actually says
“The affidavit or sworn testimony described in subparagraph (A)(i) shall be sufficient evidence to vacate a conviction or expunge an arrest under this section if the court determines that-- ``(i) the affidavit or sworn testimony is credible; and ``(ii) no other evidence is readily available.”
That sentence, in plain words
The sworn paper alone is enough proof. That holds if the judge trusts it. It also must be the only proof at hand.
What this is about
Many people who were forced have no papers to show. This rule means one trusted account can be enough. Then the record can be wiped out.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“It shall not be necessary that any person other than the movant be convicted of or arrested for an offense before the movant may file a motion under paragraph (1).”
Relief under the section does not depend on anyone else being prosecuted. No person other than the movant need be convicted of or arrested for an offense before the movant may file.
What the document actually says
“It shall not be necessary that any person other than the movant be convicted of or arrested for an offense before the movant may file a motion under paragraph (1).”
That sentence, in plain words
No one else has to be found guilty first. No one else has to be held first. The person can still file the ask.
What this is about
Many people who force others are never caught. This rule means a victim need not wait for that. Their own ask can go ahead.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“If the court denies a motion filed under paragraph (1), the denial shall be final, except as provided under subparagraph (C) of this paragraph and subject to the discovery of any new and compelling evidence or information.”
A denial is final, with two openings named in the same paragraph: the cure provision at subparagraph (C), and the discovery of any new and compelling evidence or information. Separately, the court is required to state the reasons for a denial in writing.
What the document actually says
“If the court denies a motion filed under paragraph (1), the denial shall be final, except as provided under subparagraph (C) of this paragraph and subject to the discovery of any new and compelling evidence or information.”
That sentence, in plain words
If the judge says no, that answer is final. But there are two ways around it.
What this is about
One way is when the ask can be fixed. The other is when new, strong proof turns up. The judge must also put the reasons for a no in writing.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“If the court denies a motion filed under paragraph (1) due to a curable deficiency in the motion, the court shall allow the movant sufficient time to cure the deficiency.”
Where the denial rests on a curable deficiency in the motion, the court is required to allow the movant sufficient time to cure it. This is one of the two exceptions to the finality of a denial.
What the document actually says
“If the court denies a motion filed under paragraph (1) due to a curable deficiency in the motion, the court shall allow the movant sufficient time to cure the deficiency.”
That sentence, in plain words
Say the judge says no because the ask had a flaw that can be fixed. Then the judge must give the person enough time to fix it.
What this is about
A small mistake in the papers should not end the case. The court has to allow time to put it right.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: United States district courts, United States courts of appealsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“An order granting or denying a motion under this section may be appealed in accordance with section 1291 of title 28.”
Either outcome is appealable, in accordance with section 1291 of title 28, United States Code. That statute is not indexed here, so nothing is recorded about the route it sets out.
What the document actually says
“An order granting or denying a motion under this section may be appealed in accordance with section 1291 of title 28.”
That sentence, in plain words
A yes or a no from the judge can be taken to a higher court.
What this is about
The rules for that come from another law. This part just says the door is open. Both sides can use it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“If the court grants a motion to vacate a conviction of a level A offense under subsection (b), the court shall immediately-- ``(A) vacate the conviction for cause; ``(B) set aside the verdict and enter a judgment of acquittal; and ``(C) enter an expungement order”
Three acts follow immediately on a grant. The court vacates the conviction for cause, sets aside the verdict and enters a judgment of acquittal, and enters an expungement order. The order directs that all references be expunged from all official records to the arrest of the movant for the offense, the institution of criminal proceedings relating to it, and the results of those proceedings.
What the document actually says
“If the court grants a motion to vacate a conviction of a level A offense under subsection (b), the court shall immediately-- ``(A) vacate the conviction for cause; ``(B) set aside the verdict and enter a judgment of acquittal; and ``(C) enter an expungement order”
That sentence, in plain words
When the judge says yes, the judge must act at once. The guilty ruling goes away. The verdict is set aside and the person is found not guilty. An order to erase the records goes out.
What this is about
The order covers three kinds of record. One is the arrest. One is the start of the case. One is how the case came out.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“Nothing in this subsection requires a court to amend or remove any fine or restitution order in a criminal or civil proceeding.”
A limit on the vacatur subsection. It does not require a court to amend or remove any fine or restitution order, in either a criminal or a civil proceeding.
What the document actually says
“Nothing in this subsection requires a court to amend or remove any fine or restitution order in a criminal or civil proceeding.”
That sentence, in plain words
This part does not make a judge change or drop a fine. It does not make a judge drop an order to pay money back.
What this is about
Money owed can stay owed. Wiping out the record is one thing. Paying is another.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“If a conviction is vacated under an order entered under paragraph (1), the conviction shall not be regarded as a conviction under Federal law and the movant for whom the conviction was vacated shall be considered to have the status occupied by the movant before the arrest”
The stated effect of a vacatur. The conviction is not to be regarded as a conviction under Federal law, and the movant is considered to have the status occupied before the arrest or the institution of the criminal proceedings related to the conviction.
What the document actually says
“If a conviction is vacated under an order entered under paragraph (1), the conviction shall not be regarded as a conviction under Federal law and the movant for whom the conviction was vacated shall be considered to have the status occupied by the movant before the arrest”
That sentence, in plain words
Once wiped out, the ruling no longer counts as a guilty ruling under federal law. The person stands where they stood before the arrest.
What this is about
A guilty ruling can block a job, a home, or a loan. This rule puts the person back to the way things were. It is as if the case never started.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“If the court grants a motion to expunge all records of an arrest for an offense under subsection (b), the court shall immediately enter an expungement order that directs that there be expunged from all official records all references to--”
On granting a motion to expunge, the court immediately enters an expungement order. It reaches all official records of the arrest of the movant for the offense, the institution of any criminal proceedings relating to the offense, and the results of those proceedings, if any. The subsection states the same effect as for a vacatur: the arrest is not to be regarded as an arrest under Federal law, and the movant is considered to have the status occupied before it.
What the document actually says
“If the court grants a motion to expunge all records of an arrest for an offense under subsection (b), the court shall immediately enter an expungement order that directs that there be expunged from all official records all references to--”
That sentence, in plain words
When the judge says yes to erasing an arrest, the judge must act at once. An order to erase all records of the arrest goes out.
What this is about
The same three kinds of record are covered. After that the arrest no longer counts under federal law. The person stands where they stood before it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The court that imposed sentence for a level A offense or level B offense upon a covered prisoner may reduce the term of imprisonment for the offense--”
The sentencing court may reduce a term of imprisonment on motion by the covered prisoner or on its own motion. A covered prisoner is defined in the section as a person convicted of a level A or level B offense, sentenced to imprisonment for it, and who is or was imprisoned under that sentence. The court acts after notice to the Government; after considering the factors set forth in section 3553(a) of title 18, the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person, and the community or any crime victims; and if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the offense was committed as a direct result of the prisoner having been a victim of trafficking. Any proceeding under the subsection is stated to be subject to section 3771 of title 18. Unlike vacatur, this relief reaches level B offenses.
What the document actually says
“The court that imposed sentence for a level A offense or level B offense upon a covered prisoner may reduce the term of imprisonment for the offense--”
That sentence, in plain words
A judge can cut the jail time of a person who is locked up. It must be the judge who gave the sentence.
What this is about
The person can ask, or the judge can act alone. The government gets word first. The judge must weigh the danger to others. And the judge must find the crime came from being forced.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States attorneysHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“For any motion under paragraph (1), the Government shall conduct a particularized inquiry of the facts and circumstances of the original sentencing of the covered prisoner in order to assess whether a reduction in sentence would be consistent with this section.”
A duty placed on the Government rather than the court. For any motion to reduce a term of imprisonment, it must conduct a particularized inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the original sentencing, to assess whether a reduction would be consistent with the section.
What the document actually says
“For any motion under paragraph (1), the Government shall conduct a particularized inquiry of the facts and circumstances of the original sentencing of the covered prisoner in order to assess whether a reduction in sentence would be consistent with this section.”
That sentence, in plain words
The government must take a close look at how the sentence was set at the time. It then says if a shorter term fits this law.
What this is about
This is work the government must do for each ask. It cannot just say no. It has to look at the facts of that one case.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The court shall, upon granting a motion under this section, take any additional action necessary to grant the movant full relief.”
A catch all duty. On granting any motion under the section, the court must take whatever additional action is necessary to give the movant full relief.
What the document actually says
“The court shall, upon granting a motion under this section, take any additional action necessary to grant the movant full relief.”
That sentence, in plain words
When the judge says yes, the judge must do whatever else it takes. The person must get all the help this part gives.
What this is about
Wiping out one record may leave others behind. This rule tells the judge to go the rest of the way.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“A person may not be required to pay a filing fee, service charge, copay fee, processing fee, or any other charge for filing a motion under this section.”
Filing is free. No filing fee, service charge, copay fee, processing fee or any other charge may be required for a motion under the section.
What the document actually says
“A person may not be required to pay a filing fee, service charge, copay fee, processing fee, or any other charge for filing a motion under this section.”
That sentence, in plain words
No one can be made to pay to file this ask. Not a filing fee. Not a copy fee. Not any other charge.
What this is about
Court papers often cost money. That cost can keep poor people out. Here the door is free.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“A motion under this section and any documents, pleadings, or orders relating to the motion shall be filed under seal.”
The motion itself, and any documents, pleadings or orders relating to it, are filed under seal.
What the document actually says
“A motion under this section and any documents, pleadings, or orders relating to the motion shall be filed under seal.”
That sentence, in plain words
The ask and all papers tied to it are filed under seal.
What this is about
Under seal means the public cannot read them. Court files are open by default. These are not.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not”Who acts: Federal officers, Federal employeesHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“An officer or employee may not make available for public inspection any report, paper, picture, photograph, court file, or other document, in the custody or possession of the officer or employee, that identifies the movant.”
A second bar, running against the people who hold the records rather than the file itself. An officer or employee may not make available for public inspection any report, paper, picture, photograph, court file or other document in their custody or possession that identifies the movant. The section takes "officer" and "employee" from the meanings given in section 2105 of title 5.
What the document actually says
“An officer or employee may not make available for public inspection any report, paper, picture, photograph, court file, or other document, in the custody or possession of the officer or employee, that identifies the movant.”
That sentence, in plain words
A worker for the government must not let the public see any file that names the person. That covers papers, photos, and court files.
What this is about
This is a second lock on the same door. The first keeps the file sealed. This one binds the people who hold it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall apply”Who acts: United States district courtsHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“This section shall apply to any conviction or arrest occurring before, on, or after the date of enactment of this section.”
The section reaches backward as well as forward. It applies to any conviction or arrest occurring before, on or after the date the section was enacted, which was January 23, 2026.
What the document actually says
“This section shall apply to any conviction or arrest occurring before, on, or after the date of enactment of this section.”
That sentence, in plain words
This part covers a guilty ruling or arrest from any time. Before this law, on the day of it, or after.
What this is about
Some new laws only reach ahead. This one reaches back too. An old record can be wiped out.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says
“The table of sections of chapter 237 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:”
A bookkeeping change. The table of sections at the head of chapter 237 gains a closing line reading "3771A. Motion to vacate; expungement; mitigating factors." so that the new section appears in the chapter's own list.
What the document actually says
“The table of sections of chapter 237 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:”
That sentence, in plain words
The list at the front of chapter 237 gets a new line at the end.
What this is about
Each chapter of the law books has a list of its parts. The new part must show up there. It is a bookkeeping change.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each distinct thing the new section 3771A requires or permits: who may file, what the motion must contain, when a hearing is held, what the court must find, what proof it must consider, what follows a grant or a denial, the sentence reduction for prisoners, the bar on fees, the sealing of the file, and the reach of the section backward in time.
The new section's internal cross references are not recorded one by one. The closing amendment to the table of sections is recorded as the bookkeeping change it is, and the individual line it inserts is not broken out further.
The section works by adding a new section to chapter 237 of title 18, United States Code, and by referring out to section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, to section 16(a), section 3553(a) and section 3771 of title 18, to section 1291 of title 28, and to section 2105 of title 5. None of those statutes is indexed here, so nothing is recorded about what any of them says.
