119 HR 7290 IH: Qualified Immunity Accountability Act U.S. House of Representatives 2026-01-30 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I119th CONGRESS2d SessionH. R. 7290IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESJanuary 30, 2026Ms. Johnson of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the JudiciaryA BILLTo amend title 18, United States Code, to revise the applicable standards regarding death resulting from a deprivation of rights under color of law.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Qualified Immunity Accountability Act.

2.

Deprivation of rights under color of law

Section 242 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—(1)by striking willfully and inserting knowingly or recklessly;(2)by striking , or may be sentenced to death; and(3)by adding at the end the following: For purposes of this section, an act shall be considered to have resulted in death if the act was a substantial factor contributing to the death of the person..

3.

Qualified immunity reform

Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1983) is amended by adding at the end the following:It shall not be a defense or immunity in any action brought under this section against a local law enforcement officer (as such term is defined in section 2 of the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2025), or in any action under any source of law against a Federal investigative or law enforcement officer (as such term is defined in section 2680(h) of title 28, United States Code), that—(1)the defendant was acting in good faith, or that the defendant believed, reasonably or otherwise, that his or her conduct was lawful at the time when the conduct was committed; or(2)the rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws were not clearly established at the time of their deprivation by the defendant, or that at such time, the state of the law was otherwise such that the defendant could not reasonably have been expected to know whether his or her conduct was lawful..