Sponsors (38)
The amendment could improve accountability and legal clarity by changing §1983 remedies and taking effect immediately, but it risks narrowing protections, increasing litigation costs, and creating transitional legal uncertainty for governments and affected communities.
Racial and other marginalized victims could gain clearer or expanded remedies under §1983, improving avenues for redress against official misconduct.
State and local governments would get clearer guidance on permissible conduct if the amendment clarifies liability standards, reducing uncertainty about future suits.
Victims of official misconduct could see legal changes take effect immediately, meaning faster availability of whatever remedies the amendment provides.
People harmed by state actors — particularly racial minorities and people with disabilities — could lose viable civil remedies if the amendment narrows §1983 protections.
If the amendment expands liability, taxpayers and local governments could face higher litigation costs and larger settlements, straining local budgets.
Immediate enactment could create short-term legal uncertainty as courts, plaintiffs, and defendants must interpret the changed statute without transitional guidance.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Appends substantive language to 42 U.S.C. § 1983’s civil‑action provision, altering the statute that governs lawsuits for deprivation of rights.
Official title: To provide a civil remedy for an individual whose rights have been violated by a person acting under Federal authority, and for other purposes.
Introduced November 18, 2025 by Hank Johnson · Last progress November 18, 2025
Amends the federal civil‑action statute by appending new text to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and gives the Act the short title “Bivens Act of 2025.” The bill inserts additional wording immediately before the final period of § 1983’s civil‑action sentence; because the inserted text is not shown, the precise legal effect cannot be determined from the bill text provided, but the change is substantive and will alter the scope or content of the existing civil‑action provision for deprivation‑of‑rights claims.