Who is affected and how:

• Federal courts and judges: The judiciary as an institution will have investigations and reports completed even when a judge departs or dies, creating a fuller official record of complaints and findings. Individual judges who resign or retire can expect that pending complaints will still be pursued to conclusion.

• Judicial misconduct investigatory bodies and committees: These bodies must continue work on cases despite a subject judge leaving office or dying, which may increase workload and require completing reports for matters that otherwise might have been closed. They may need to allocate staff time and administrative resources to finish investigations.

• Complainants and the public: People who file complaints will see that their allegations are not automatically dismissed when a judge leaves office or dies, improving the chance of a completed investigation and an official report. This may increase transparency and public confidence in the oversight process.

• Courts' administrative offices and records management: Offices that maintain judicial misconduct records will need to retain and process completed reports for cases that conclude after a judge's departure or death. This preserves institutional memory and documentation for potential future reference.

Net effect: The change strengthens procedural continuity and recordkeeping in the judicial misconduct system. It imposes procedural obligations on investigative committees but does not, by itself, expand disciplinary powers, appropriate new funds, or change sanctions available once a judge is no longer in office.