Sponsors (3)
The bill increases transparency and uniformity about third‑party funding in litigation—helping courts detect conflicts and reducing temporal uncertainty—yet it imposes new compliance burdens, raises risks from retroactive application, and could chill associations or spark privilege and constitutional disputes.
Parties to civil cases and judges gain clearer disclosure of who funds or stands to benefit from litigation, improving detection of conflicts of interest and informing judicial and party decisions.
Ongoing and future civil cases get uniform rules about disclosure and applicability, reducing uncertainty about which law governs pending proceedings.
Courts may review funding or financial agreements in camera to verify disclosures, which helps prevent hidden third-party control or improper influence while protecting sensitive material from public exposure.
Parties, third-party funders, and small organizations will face increased compliance costs and administrative burdens to identify, document, and produce funding agreements within tight deadlines.
Retroactive application to pending cases could change substantive or procedural rights, force reopenings or relitigation, increase legal costs and delays, and prompt due-process or constitutional challenges.
Donors, members, or associates of organizations may fear exposure even with redaction rules, potentially chilling charitable giving, membership, or association.
Based on analysis of 3 sections of legislative text.
Requires parties in federal civil cases to disclose in writing any person (other than counsel) who has a legal right to receive money or other value contingent on the outcome or proceeds of the case, and to produce the underlying agreements to the court for in camera review and, subject to protective orders, to other parties. The rule includes defined exceptions for ordinary loans, limited-interest loans, reimbursement of previously paid attorney’s fees, and grants, and permits redaction of donor/member/associate lists unless those persons hold a contingent legal right. Disclosures must be made promptly (tied to initial disclosures, agreement execution, or court schedule), must be supplemented if materially incomplete, and the rule applies to cases pending at enactment as well as cases filed afterward.
Introduced January 12, 2026 by Darrell Issa · Last progress January 12, 2026