I 
115TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION 
H. R. 968 
To enforce the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of effective counsel 
at all stages of the adversarial process, to confer jurisdiction upon the 
district courts of the United States to provide declaratory and injunctive 
relief against systemic violations of such right, and for other purposes. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
FEBRUARY 7, 2017 
Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York (for himself, Mr. CUMMINGS, and 
Mr. JEFFRIES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary 
A BILL 
To enforce the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance 
of effective counsel at all stages of the adversarial proc-
ess, to confer jurisdiction upon the district courts of 
the United States to provide declaratory and injunctive 
relief against systemic violations of such right, and for 
other purposes. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Equal Justice Under 
Law Act of 2017’’. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:04 Feb 17, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H968.IH
H968
SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—An indigent individual facing 
criminal prosecution or juvenile delinquency in a State 
court shall be entitled to the effective assistance of coun-
sel, as guaranteed by the Sixth and Fourteenth Amend-
ments, at the State’s expense. If the State delegates fiscal 
or administrative authority over the indigent defense func-
tion to one of its political subdivisions, the State retains 
ultimate responsibility for securing counsel for the indi-
vidual. 
(b) INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE.—The assistance of 
counsel is considered ineffective when a class can dem-
onstrate that counsel’s performance was not reasonable 
under prevailing professional norms. 
SEC. 3. REMEDY. 
(a) CLASS ACTION AUTHORIZED.—If a State official 
or one or more of a State’s political subdivisions fails on 
a systemic basis to guarantee the right to the assistance 
of effective counsel as guaranteed by the Sixth and Four-
teenth Amendments, aggrieved persons may, prior to con-
viction, commence a civil class action in the district courts 
of the United States to seek declaratory, injunctive, or 
other equitable relief. 
(b) ABSTENTION DOCTRINE.—A court entertaining a 
petition for relief filed under this Act need not apply the 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:04 Feb 17, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H968.IH
H968
SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
abstention restrictions articulated in Younger v. Harris 
(401 U.S. 37). 
(c) BURDEN OF PROOF.—Members of the class shall 
have the burden of establishing that there is a likelihood 
of imminent and irreparable injury from that violation. 
(d) ATTORNEY’S FEES.—In any action or proceeding 
under this section, the court, in its discretion, may allow 
the prevailing party, other than a named official of a State 
or political subdivision of a State, a reasonable attorney’s 
fee as part of the costs. In awarding an attorney’s fee 
under this subsection, the court, in its discretion, may in-
clude expert fees as part of the attorney’s fee. 
(e) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this section 
shall restrict any right that any individual has under any 
other statute or under common law to seek redress for 
a violation of the right to counsel. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:04 Feb 17, 2017
Jkt 069200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H968.IH
H968
SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS