PRIORITY BILLS:Unable to load updates
ModernAction Logo
In House Committee

Epstein Crime Victims Act

H.R. 4946 – Epstein Crime Victims Act: Civil lawsuits when victims are not told of plea deals

119th Congress

H.R. 4946 would change federal crime victims’ rights law to let victims sue the U.S. Government if it makes a plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement and does not notify them in time. It also updates the law to cover nonprosecution agreements. It has been introduced in the House and sent to the Judiciary Committee.

Bill Number
HR4946
Chamber
house

What This Bill Does

This bill changes a section of federal law that lists rights for people who are victims of federal crimes. Current law gives victims the right to be told about plea bargains and deferred prosecution agreements, but it limits how they can enforce those rights. The bill first updates the law to make clear that victims also have the right to be informed about nonprosecution agreements. These are formal decisions not to charge someone, often in exchange for cooperation or other conditions. Next, the bill adds a new right to sue the federal government in a specific situation. If the government enters into a plea bargain or a deferred prosecution agreement and does not tell the victim in a timely way, the victim may bring a civil action in a U.S. district court. Through that lawsuit, the victim could ask the court to enforce any crime-victim rights that are still “remaining” and “applicable” under the existing list of rights in the law. The bill keeps the general rule that the crime victims’ rights law does not create money-damage claims against the government, but it carves out this new exception for failures to notify victims about plea bargains or deferred prosecution agreements.

Why It Matters

This bill could change how federal prosecutors handle communication with crime victims when making plea deals or deferred prosecution agreements. Knowing that victims may sue if they are not told in time may push government agencies to strengthen their notice systems and record-keeping. For victims, the bill would create a clearer path to ask a court to step in if they were left out of important decisions about resolving a case. It does not spell out what specific remedies courts must give, so the actual impact on case outcomes and government behavior would depend on how judges interpret and apply the new right over time. For the public and the justice system, the bill touches on the balance between efficient plea negotiations and victims’ participation rights. It may lead to more court review of how federal plea agreements are reached and communicated, but the extent of that change is not defined in the bill text.

External Categories and Tags

Categories

civil-rights

Tags

crime-victims-rights (100%)civil-action (90%)victim-notification (85%)federal-courts (60%)plea-bargains (55%)deferred-prosecution (50%)nonprosecution-agreements (45%)government-liability (40%)

Arguments

Arguments in support

  • Gives victims a concrete way to enforce their statutory rights when the government fails to notify them about major case decisions.
  • May encourage federal prosecutors to take notification duties more seriously and invest in better systems to contact victims.
  • Aligns the law with modern prosecutorial practices by explicitly covering nonprosecution agreements, which can resolve serious cases without charges.
  • Helps ensure victims can participate in proceedings and be heard before key agreements are finalized.
  • Signals that victims’ rights are legally meaningful, not just aspirational, by attaching a clear consequence when they are ignored in this area.

Arguments against

  • Could increase litigation against the federal government, adding costs and slowing down the criminal justice process.
  • May create uncertainty for prosecutors negotiating plea or deferred prosecution agreements if they fear later lawsuits over whether notice was “timely.”
  • Courts may face difficult questions about what remedies to grant, especially if the plea or agreement is already in place.
  • Risk that fear of lawsuits could make prosecutors more cautious about using plea or deferred prosecution tools, potentially reducing flexibility in resolving cases.
  • The focus on plea bargains and deferred prosecution agreements may leave other types of notification failures unaddressed, creating uneven enforcement of victims’ rights.

Key Facts

  • Expands victims’ notification rights to include nonprosecution agreements in addition to plea bargains and deferred prosecution agreements.
  • Creates a specific civil cause of action allowing a crime victim to sue the U.S. Government in federal district court if the government fails to notify the victim in a timely manner about a plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement.
  • Limits the new lawsuit to enforcing “remaining applicable rights” the victim has under the existing crime victims’ rights list in 18 U.S.C. § 3771(a).
  • Keeps the general rule that the crime victims’ rights chapter does not create damages claims, but creates an explicit exception for this new right of action.
  • Amends 18 U.S.C. § 3771, which is the main federal statute governing crime victims’ rights in federal criminal cases.

Gotchas

  • The new right to sue only applies when the government fails to notify victims about plea bargains or deferred prosecution agreements; it does not cover failures to notify about nonprosecution agreements even though those must now be disclosed.
  • The bill limits suits to enforcing “remaining applicable rights,” which may not allow victims to undo completed plea deals; courts will likely need to define what remedies are available.
  • The general no-damages rule for crime victims’ rights remains in place, so the bill does not clearly authorize money damages, even though it creates a cause of action against the government.

Full Bill Text

We're fetching the official bill text from Congress.gov. Check back shortly.