LegisTrack
Back to all bills
HR 3603119th CongressIn Committee

Andrew Kearse Accountability for Denial of Medical Care Act of 2025

Introduced: May 23, 2025
Civil Rights & JusticeHealthcare
Standard Summary
Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

Andrew Kearse Accountability for Denial of Medical Care Act of 2025 (H.R. 3603) would add a new federal crime and enforcement framework to ensure that individuals in federal custody receive medical attention when they show medical distress. The bill creates a specific offense for certain federal officials (law enforcement officers, Bureau of Prisons employees, and U.S. Marshals Service employees) who negligently fail to obtain or provide immediate medical care to someone in their custody, if that failure results in unnecessary pain, injury, or death. It also authorizes state-level civil actions, requires agency IG investigations with potential referral for prosecution, establishes a confidential complaint process, and mandates training on medical-response duties. The measure is named to highlight accountability for denial of medical care in custody and would be added as Sec. 251 to Title 18, U.S. Code. Introduced in the House on May 23, 2025 by a group of Representatives (including Pressley, Carson, Johnson of Georgia, Kelly of Illinois, Lee, Norton, Ocasio-Cortez, Ramirez, Schakowsky, and Tlaib) and referred to the Judiciary Committee. The bill defines key terms (e.g., “covered official,” “medical distress”) and sets out penalties, enforcement mechanisms, and training requirements.

Key Points

  • 1New federal offense: Adds a crime under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13 making it unlawful for a “covered official” to negligently fail to obtain or provide immediate medical attention to a person in federal custody who displays medical distress, if the failure results in unnecessary pain, injury, or death.
  • 2Covered officials: Applies to federal law enforcement officers (as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 115), Bureau of Prisons employees, and U.S. Marshals Service employees.
  • 3Medical distress definition: Includes conditions such as breathing difficulties.
  • 4Penalties: Violations carry fines, and/or imprisonment for up to one year.
  • 5Civil action option for states: States can sue in federal district court for appropriate equitable and declaratory relief if a state resident is aggrieved by a violation (civil enforcement by the state).
  • 6Inspector General role: Appropriate IG must investigate incidents where a covered official fails to obtain/provide medical attention and the person suffers harm; if negligence is found, the IG must refer the case to the Attorney General for prosecution.
  • 7Confidential complaint process: Each relevant IG must establish a confidential process for individuals to report incidents involving covered officials.
  • 8Training requirement: Agencies must train covered officials on obtaining or providing medical assistance to individuals in medical distress.
  • 9Technical/conforming amendment: Adds Sec. 251 to the table of sections in chapter 13 of Title 18, U.S.C., to reflect the new offense.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected:- Federal custody populations (detainees and inmates) and the federal officials who supervise or interact with them (federal law enforcement officers, Bureau of Prisons staff, U.S. Marshals Service personnel).Secondary group/area affected:- Federal agencies employing covered officials (training, policies, and compliance obligations).- State governments and stateAttorney Generals’ offices, due to the new civil-enforcement avenue in federal courts.Additional impacts:- Inspector General offices: expanded investigative and referral duties; potential workload increases.- Legal/operational dynamics: potential for increased prosecutions under the new offense and heightened attention to immediate medical response protocols; possible implications for medical decision-making and timeliness of responses in custody scenarios.- Budgetary/training considerations: costs associated with mandatory medical-response training and the confidential complaint process.The bill does not create a private right of action for individuals in federal custody; civil enforcement is available to states via the attorney general.The offense centers on “negligent” failure to obtain/provide care, so the standard is based on negligence rather than intentional harm.The protections apply specifically to officials within federal custody settings (not necessarily private contractors unless they are official employees within the enumerated agencies).
Generated by gpt-5-nano on Oct 7, 2025