Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
The No Corporate Crooks Act bars individuals who served as chief executive officers and were finally convicted of certain listed crimes from appointment to any position in the executive branch. "Covered crimes" include bribery, copyright infringement, corruption, cybercrime, embezzlement, fraud, insider trading, wage theft, and tax evasion. If a person violates the prohibition, they must be removed from executive branch service.
Liberals emphasize anti‑corruption and public trust benefits
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear substantive disqualification rule but is lightly drafted: it sets an eligibility bar and removal penalty but omits many definitional, procedural, fiscal, and integration details that would be expected for a statutory change affecting executive-branch appointments.
The No Corporate Crooks Act bars individuals who served as chief executive officers and were finally convicted of certain listed crimes from appointment to any position in the executive branch. "Covered crimes" include bribery, copyright infringement, corruption, cybercrime, embezzlement, fraud, insider trading, wage theft, and tax evasion.
If a person violates the prohibition, they must be removed from executive branch service.
The bill does not include implementation or enforcement details beyond removal for violation.
Technically simple and low-cost measures increase chance, but vagueness, civil‑liberties arguments, and Senate hurdles reduce likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear substantive disqualification rule but is lightly drafted: it sets an eligibility bar and removal penalty but omits many definitional, procedural, fiscal, and integration details that would be expected for a statutory change affecting executive-branch appointments.
Liberals emphasize anti‑corruption and public trust benefits
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize anti‑corruption and public trust benefits
Likely broadly supportive as an anti‑corruption and accountability measure limiting corporate malefactors' access to government power.
May want stronger or broader measures but will view this as a useful statutory bar against corporate criminals entering the executive branch.
Likely cautiously favorable but pragmatic, supporting anti‑corruption aims while worrying about statutory clarity and unintended consequences.
Would seek clearer definitions, procedural safeguards, and an assessment of legal risks before full endorsement.
Likely opposed as an overbroad constraint on executive appointment authority and a punitive, statutory qualification for service.
Concerns include federal overreach, second‑chance principles, and inclusion of minor offenses like copyright infringement.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically simple and low-cost measures increase chance, but vagueness, civil‑liberties arguments, and Senate hurdles reduce likelihood.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize anti‑corruption and public trust benefits
Technically simple and low-cost measures increase chance, but vagueness, civil‑liberties arguments, and Senate hurdles reduce likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear substantive disqualification rule but is lightly drafted: it sets an eligibility bar and removal penalty but omits many definitional, procedural,…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.