BAD Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Torres, Norma J. [D-CA-35]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jul 30, 2026
Bottom line
The bill significantly extends the window for prosecuting federal corruption offenses by tying the statute of limitations to the date of discovery rather than the date of commission.
What it actually does
This bill amends federal law to change how the statute of limitations is applied to bribery (18 U.S.C. 201) and theft or bribery concerning federal funds (18 U.S.C. 666). Instead of the standard 5-year limitation period beginning from the offense date, the period will now commence only when the offense is discovered by, or reported to, a Federal law enforcement agency.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill is essential for combating sophisticated corruption schemes, which often involve complex concealment tactics that delay discovery. They contend that the current fixed statute of limitations can allow corrupt officials to evade justice, especially when offenses are not immediately apparent, and that extending the discovery window will enhance accountability and deter future misconduct.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that removing a fixed statute of limitations could lead to indefinite legal exposure for individuals, making it difficult to defend against charges related to events far in the past due to lost evidence or faded memories. They may also express concerns about potential prosecutorial overreach or the fairness of prosecuting someone decades after an alleged offense.
The bill text is exceptionally short and straightforward to read, but its implications for legal procedure and public accountability are substantial, warranting careful consideration.
Section 2, amending 18 U.S.C. 3282
Extension of Statute of Limitations for Bribery and Theft Offenses
This provision alters the rule for how long prosecutors have to bring charges for federal bribery (18 U.S.C. 201) and theft or bribery involving federal funds (18 U.S.C. 666). Currently, the clock typically starts ticking from when the crime is committed. This bill proposes that the clock will not begin until a federal law enforcement agency discovers or is reported the offense, effectively creating an open-ended statute of limitations until discovery.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that tying the statute of limitations to discovery is essential for prosecuting sophisticated corruption, which often remains hidden for years. They assert that this change ensures justice can be served even when offenders actively conceal their crimes, thereby strengthening public integrity and deterring future misconduct.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that this provision creates an unfair legal environment by removing a definitive end to potential prosecution, making it difficult for individuals to move on from past events or defend themselves against very old accusations where evidence may be lost or memories faded.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the goal of ensuring accountability for corruption, especially in cases of delayed discovery, against concerns about the fairness of indefinite legal exposure and the practical challenges of prosecuting very old cases.