HR 8991 — SHADOW Act

Summary

This bill would require the Supreme Court to publicly explain its decisions when granting or denying requests to pause (stay) lower court orders during appeals. The Supreme Court would need to demonstrate that the applicant will suffer concrete and irreparable injury without the stay, and must consider impacts on other parties and the public interest. The written explanations would be published on the Supreme Court's public docket, except in emergencies where they could be published within seven days. The bill also applies similar requirements to Supreme Court orders (writs), requiring the Court to justify that critical circumstances exist to protect a clearly established legal right. In all cases, the written reasons must be made public at the time of the decision or within seven days if immediate action was necessary.

AI-generated plain-language summary of the bill text — neutral, and may be imperfect. See the full text below for the exact wording.

Sponsor (1)

Rep. Raskin, Jamie [D-MD-8] (D-MD)

Money behind the sponsor

Top reported contributors to Jamie Raskin’s campaign committee (2024 cycle) — who funds the bill’s sponsor, not a claim about this bill. Data from FEC.

NULL $54,700
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY $20,773
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY $10,775
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY $7,100
ORIOLES $6,600

Organizations whose employees gave the most — itemized individual contributions grouped by the donor’s reported employer (FEC Schedule A). Full finance for Jamie Raskin → · Outside spending →

Actions (2)

May 21, 2026 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. · house
May 21, 2026 Introduced in House

Similar bills (6)

Bills with similar text or summary — includes reintroductions across Congresses. Ranked by semantic similarity of the bill text (computed locally); a neutral discovery aid, not a claim the bills are duplicates.

Full text

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 21, 2026

Mr. Raskin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To amend section 2101 of title 28, United States Code, to set forth factors for stays pending appeal.

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 “Supreme Court Honesty and Disclosure of Orders and Writs Act” or the “SHADOW Act”.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT TO SET FORTH FACTORS FOR STAYS PENDING APPEAL.

Section 2101(f) of title 28, United States Code, is amended—

(1) by striking “In any case” and inserting “(1) In any case”; and

(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:

“(2) In determining whether to grant or deny a stay under this subsection the Supreme Court or a justice thereof shall—

“(A) require a showing of specific, concrete, and irreparable injury that is distinct from and greater than any harm resulting solely from the operation of the stay that is being challenged;

“(B) ensure that the determination under this section does not entail findings or conclusions on the ultimate merits of the case or the likelihood of a particular party prevailing; and

“(C) provide that any such stay shall not be accorded precedential effect except to the extent necessary to resolve the dispute between the parties in which the stay was entered.

“(3)(A) The Supreme Court or justice shall set forth on the record the basis for an issuance or denial of a stay under this section, including—

“(i) whether, absent such relief, the applicant will suffer an injury described in paragraph (2)(A);

“(ii) whether issuance of such relief will substantially injure any other party interested in the proceeding; and

“(iii) whether the determination to issue or deny such stay was in the public interest.

“(B) The basis under subparagraph (A) shall be published on the public docket of the Supreme Court at the time of the issuance or denial of such stay.

“(C) The requirement under subparagraph (B) shall not apply if the Supreme Court or a justice thereof determines that immediate action is necessary to prevent imminent or irreparable harm. If there is such a need, the basis under subparagraph (A) shall be published on the public docket of the Supreme Court not later than 7 days after the issuance or denial of such stay.

“(4) For purposes of this subsection, a ‘stay’ includes any order of the Supreme Court or a justice thereof granting or denying relief to suspend, modify, or preserve the effect of a lower court’s order granting or denying injunctive relief.”.

SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO THE ALL WRITS ACT.

Section 1651 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

“(c)(1) The Supreme Court or a justice thereof may only issue a writ enjoining any party from the conduct specified in the writ, if the Court or a justice thereof determines that enjoining such conduct is necessary as a result of a critical and exigent circumstance to protect an indisputably clear legal right that is at issue in the case.

“(2)(A) The Supreme Court or a justice thereof shall set forth on the record the reasons for the determination made under paragraph (1) including identifying, if applicable, the legal right at issue in the case and why it is indisputably clear, the motion for a writ.

“(B) The reasons under subparagraph (A) shall be published on the public docket of the Supreme Court at the time at which the motion for the writ is granted or denied.

“(C) The requirement under subparagraph (B) shall not apply if the Supreme Court or a justice thereof determines that immediate action is necessary to prevent imminent or irreparable harm. If there is such a need, the basis under subparagraph (A) shall be published on the public docket of the Supreme Court not later than 7 days after the writ is granted or denied.”. <all>

Comments

Loading comments…