District of Columbia Judicial Financial Transparency Act
PL 114-257 (H.R.4419), enacted 12/14/2016

130 STAT. 1350 
PUBLIC LAW 114–257—DEC. 14, 2016 
Public Law 114–257 
114th Congress 
An Act 
To update the financial disclosure requirements for judges of the District of Columbia 
courts and to make other improvements to the District of Columbia courts. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘District of Columbia Judicial 
Financial Transparency Act’’. 
SEC. 2. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR JUDGES OF DIS-
TRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS. 
(a) REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED.—Section 11–1530, D.C. Official 
Code, is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘§ 11–1530. Financial statements 
‘‘(a) Pursuant to such rules as the Commission shall promul-
gate, each judge of the District of Columbia courts shall, within 
1 year following the date of enactment of the District of Columbia 
Court Reorganization Act of 1970 and at least annually thereafter, 
file with the Commission a report containing the following informa-
tion: 
‘‘(1)(A) The source, type and amount of the judge’s income 
which exceeds $200 (other than income from the United States 
government and income referred to in subparagraph (C)) for 
the period covered by the report. 
‘‘(B) The source and type of the judge’s spouse’s income 
which exceeds $1,000 (other than income from the United States 
government and income referred to in subparagraph (C)) for 
the period covered by the report. 
‘‘(C) The source and type of income which consists of divi-
dends, rents, interest, and capital gains received by the judge 
and the judge’s spouse during such period which exceeds $200 
in amount or value, and an indication of which of the following 
categories the amount or value of such item of income is 
within— 
‘‘(i) not more than $1,000; 
‘‘(ii) greater than 1,000 but not more than $2,500; 
‘‘(iii) greater than $2,500 but not more than $5,000; 
‘‘(iv) greater than $5,000 but not more than $15,000; 
‘‘(v) greater than $15,000 but not more than $50,000; 
‘‘(vi) greater than $50,000 but not more than $100,000; 
‘‘(vii) greater than $100,000 but not more than 
$1,000,000; 
District of 
Columbia 
Judicial 
Financial 
Transparency 
Act. 
Dec. 14, 2016 
[H.R. 4419] 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
05:27 Jul 08, 2022
Jkt 059194
PO 00002
Frm 00318
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\STATUTES\2016\PT2\59194PT2.001
59194PT2
dkrause on LAP5T8D0R2PROD with DISTILLER
130 STAT. 1351 
PUBLIC LAW 114–257—DEC. 14, 2016 
‘‘(viii) greater than $1,000,000 but not more than 
$5,000,000; or 
‘‘(ix) greater than $5,000,000. 
‘‘(2) The name and address of each private foundation 
or eleemosynary institution, and of each business or profes-
sional corporation, firm, or enterprise in which the judge was 
an officer, director, proprietor, or partner during such period. 
‘‘(3) The identity and category of value (as set forth in 
subsection (b)) of each liability of $10,000 or more owed by 
the judge or by the judge and the judge’s spouse jointly at 
any time during such period. 
‘‘(4) The source and value of all gifts in the aggregate 
amount or value of $250 or more from any single source received 
by the judge during such period, except gifts from the judge’s 
spouse or any of the judge’s children or parents. 
‘‘(5) The identity of each trust in which the judge held 
a beneficial interest having a value of $10,000 or more at 
any time during such period, and in the case of any trust 
in which the judge held any beneficial interest during such 
period, the identity, if known, of each interest in real or per-
sonal property in which the trust held a beneficial interest 
having a value of $10,000 or more at any time during such 
period. If the judge cannot obtain the identity of the trust 
interest, the judge shall request the trustee to report that 
information to the Commission. 
‘‘(6) The identity and category of value (as set forth in 
subsection (b)) of each interest in real or personal property 
having a value of $10,000 or more which the judge owned 
at any time during such period. 
‘‘(7) The amount or value and source of each honorarium 
of $250 or more received by the judge and the judge’s spouse 
during such period. 
‘‘(8) The source and amount of all money, other than that 
received from the United States government, received in the 
form of an expense account or as reimbursement for expendi-
tures from any source aggregating more than $250 during 
such period. 
‘‘(9) The source and amount of all waivers or partial waivers 
of fees or charges accepted by the judge on behalf of the judge 
or the judge’s spouse, domestic partner, or guest during such 
period. 
‘‘(b) For purposes of paragraphs (3) and (6) of subsection (a), 
the categories of value set forth in this subsection are— 
‘‘(1) not more than $15,000; 
‘‘(2) greater than $15,000 but not more than $50,000; 
‘‘(3) greater than $50,000 but not more than $100,000; 
‘‘(4) greater than $100,000 but not more than $250,000; 
‘‘(5) greater than $250,000 but not more than $500,000; 
‘‘(6) greater than $500,000 but not more than $1,000,000; 
‘‘(7) greater than $1,000,000 but not more than $5,000,000; 
‘‘(8) greater than $5,000,000 but not more than $25,000,000; 
‘‘(9) greater than $25,000,000 but not more than 
$50,000,000; and 
‘‘(10) greater than $50,000,000. 
‘‘(c)(1) Reports filed pursuant to this section shall, upon written 
request, and notice to the reporting judge for purposes of making 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
05:27 Jul 08, 2022
Jkt 059194
PO 00002
Frm 00319
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\STATUTES\2016\PT2\59194PT2.001
59194PT2
dkrause on LAP5T8D0R2PROD with DISTILLER
130 STAT. 1352 
PUBLIC LAW 114–257—DEC. 14, 2016 
an application to the Commission for a redaction pursuant to para-
graph (2), be made available for public inspection and copying 
within a reasonable time after filing and during the period they 
are kept by the Commission (in accordance with rules promulgated 
by the Commission), and shall be kept by the Commission for 
not less than 3 years. 
‘‘(2) This section does not require the public availability of 
reports filed by a judge if upon application by the reporting judge, 
a finding is made by the Commission that revealing personal and 
sensitive information could endanger that judge or a family member 
of that judge, except that a report may be redacted pursuant to 
this paragraph only— 
‘‘(A) to the extent necessary to protect the individual who 
filed the report or a family member of that individual; and 
‘‘(B) for as long as the danger to such individual exists. 
‘‘(d) The intentional failure by a judge of a District of Columbia 
court to file a report required by this section, or the filing of 
a fraudulent report, shall constitute willful misconduct in office 
and shall be grounds for removal from office under section 11– 
1526(a)(2).’’. 
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a) 
shall apply with respect to reports filed under section 11–1530, 
D.C. Official Code, that cover periods beginning during or after 
2016. 
SEC. 3. AUTHORITY OF PROBATE DIVISION TO USE MAGISTRATE 
JUDGES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 11–1732(j)(5), District of Columbia 
Official Code, is amended by striking ‘‘Family Divisions’’ and 
inserting ‘‘Probate Divisions, and the Family Court,’’. 
(b) TECHNICAL
AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 11– 
1732(j)(4)(A), District of Columbia Official Code, is amended by 
striking ‘‘Family Division’’ and inserting ‘‘Family Court’’. 
SEC. 4. AUTHORITY OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS TO ACCEPT 
CERTAIN TYPES OF PAYMENTS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter III of chapter 17 of title 11, 
District of Columbia Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following: 
‘‘§ 11–1748. Authority of courts to accept certain types of 
payments 
‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the term ‘electronic funds 
transfer’— 
‘‘(1) means a transfer of funds, other than a transaction 
by check, draft, or similar paper instrument, that is initiated 
through an electronic terminal, telephone, or computer or mag-
netic tape for the purpose of ordering, instructing, or author-
izing a financial institution to debit or credit an account; and 
‘‘(2) includes point of sale transfers, automated teller 
machine transfers, direct deposit or withdrawal of funds, trans-
fers initiated by telephone, and transfers resulting from debit 
card transactions. 
‘‘(b) AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS AND ELEC-
TRONIC FUNDS TRANSFERS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The District of Columbia courts may 
accept payment of fines, fees, escrow payments, restitution, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
05:27 Jul 08, 2022
Jkt 059194
PO 00002
Frm 00320
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\STATUTES\2016\PT2\59194PT2.001
59194PT2
dkrause on LAP5T8D0R2PROD with DISTILLER
130 STAT. 1353 
PUBLIC LAW 114–257—DEC. 14, 2016 
bonds, and other payments to the courts by credit card or 
electronic funds transfer. 
‘‘(2) USE OF VENDORS AND THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS.—The 
Executive officer— 
‘‘(A) may contract with a bank or credit card vendor, 
or other third party provider, for purposes of accepting 
payments by credit card or electronic funds transfer; and 
‘‘(B) shall make every effort to find the lowest cost 
vendor for purposes of accepting such payments. 
‘‘(3) RESPONSIBILITY FOR PAYING FEES.—Under any contract 
entered into under paragraph (2), the person making the pay-
ment shall be responsible for covering any fee or charge associ-
ated or imposed with respect to the method of payment. 
‘‘(4) COMPLETION OF PAYMENT.—If a person elects to make 
a payment to the District of Columbia courts by a method 
authorized under paragraph (1), the payment shall not be 
deemed to be made until the courts receive the funds. 
‘‘(c) AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT CHECKS.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The District of Columbia courts may 
accept payment of fines, fees, escrow payments, restitution, 
bonds, and other payments to the courts by check. 
‘‘(2) USE OF CHECK GUARANTEE VENDOR.—The Executive 
Officer— 
‘‘(A) may contract with a check guarantee vendor for 
purposes of accepting payments by check; and 
‘‘(B) shall make every effort to find the lowest cost 
vendor for purposes of accepting such payments. 
‘‘(3) RESPONSIBILITY FOR PAYING FEES.—Under any contract 
entered into under paragraph (2), the person making the pay-
ment by check shall be responsible for covering any fee or 
charge associated or imposed with respect to the method of 
payment. 
‘‘(d) LIABILITY FOR NON-PAYMENT.—If a check or other method 
of payment, including payment by credit card, debit card, or charge 
card, so received is not duly paid, or is paid and subsequently 
charged back to the District of Columbia courts, the person by 
whom such check or other method of payment has been tendered 
shall remain liable for the payment, to the same extent as if 
such check or other method of payment had not been tendered.’’. 
(b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of 
sections for subchapter III of chapter 17 of title 11, District of 
Columbia Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘11–1748. Authority of courts to accept certain types of payments.’’. 
SEC. 5. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY PER-
MITTED FOR CASES UNDER JURISDICTION OF SMALL 
CLAIMS AND CONCILIATION BRANCH OF SUPERIOR COURT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 11–1321, District of Columbia Official 
Code, is amended by striking ‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$10,000’’. 
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by subsection (a) 
shall apply to any case filed in the Superior Court of the District 
of Columbia on or after the date of enactment of this Act. 
SEC. 6. AUTHORITY TO APPROVE COMPENSATION OF ATTORNEYS IN 
EXCESS OF MAXIMUM AMOUNT. 
(a) IN GENERAL.— 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
05:27 Jul 08, 2022
Jkt 059194
PO 00002
Frm 00321
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
G:\STATUTES\2016\PT2\59194PT2.001
59194PT2
dkrause on LAP5T8D0R2PROD with DISTILLER
130 STAT. 1354 
PUBLIC LAW 114–257—DEC. 14, 2016 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4419 (S. 2966): 
HOUSE REPORTS: No. 114–745 (Comm. on Oversight and Government Reform). 
SENATE REPORTS: No. 114–359 (Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs) accompanying S. 2966. 
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 162 (2016): 
Sept. 20, 22, considered and passed House. 
Nov. 29, considered and passed Senate. 
(1) CRIMINAL DEFENSE APPOINTMENTS.—Section 11–2604(c), 
District of Columbia Official Code, is amended by striking 
the last sentence and inserting the following: ‘‘Each chief judge 
may delegate such approval authority to an active or senior 
judge in the court in which the chief judge sits.’’. 
(2) CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT APPOINTMENTS.—Section 16– 
2326.01(f), District of Columbia Official Code, is amended— 
(A) by striking ‘‘(f)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘(f)’’; 
(B) by striking paragraph (2); and 
(C) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘Each chief 
judge may delegate such approval authority to an active 
or senior judge in the court in which the chief judge sits.’’. 
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by subsection 
(a) shall apply with respect to any case or proceeding initiated 
on or after the date of enactment of this Act. 
Approved December 14, 2016. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
05:27 Jul 08, 2022
Jkt 059194
PO 00002
Frm 00322
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6580
G:\STATUTES\2016\PT2\59194PT2.001
59194PT2
dkrause on LAP5T8D0R2PROD with DISTILLER