Don't Settle for Corruption Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Larson, John B. [D-CT-1]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jun 18, 2026
Bottom line
The "Don't Settle for Corruption Act" seeks to increase transparency and congressional oversight over executive branch settlements, particularly those involving current or former Presidents, by requiring a joint resolution of approval.
What it actually does
This bill amends title 28, United States Code, Section 2414, to require explicit congressional approval for certain compromise settlements involving the President or a former President. Specifically, any settlement of a claim or suit brought by a President or former President against the United States, its agencies, or officials must be reported to Congress and cannot be approved without the enactment of a joint resolution of approval within 60 days.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill enhances transparency and accountability by preventing the executive branch from unilaterally settling claims involving the President or former President without congressional review. They contend it safeguards against potential conflicts of interest or the appearance of impropriety, ensuring public funds are used judiciously and that settlements are not used to obscure wrongdoing or provide undue benefit to a President or former President.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that this bill politicizes the settlement process, potentially delaying or complicating legitimate resolutions of claims involving the President or former President. They may contend it could infringe upon the executive branch's authority to manage litigation and settlements, creating an unnecessary hurdle that could lead to prolonged legal battles and increased costs for taxpayers if settlements cannot be reached efficiently.
The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions quickly.
Section 2, amending 28 U.S.C. 2414(c)
Congressional Approval for Covered Settlements
This provision introduces a new requirement that certain compromise settlements, specifically those defined as "covered settlements," must receive congressional approval through the enactment of a joint resolution. Without this resolution, the settlement cannot be considered approved or paid. This fundamentally changes the process for these specific types of settlements.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision ensures greater transparency and accountability by subjecting high-profile settlements to public and legislative scrutiny, preventing potential abuses of power or secret deals.
Critics contend
Critics might argue this provision could politicize the legal settlement process, potentially delaying or preventing legitimate settlements and increasing litigation costs for the government.
Tradeoffs
Balances executive efficiency in resolving legal matters against congressional oversight and public transparency, particularly in sensitive cases involving high-ranking officials.
Section 2, amending 28 U.S.C. 2414(d) and (e)
Reporting Requirements and 60-Day Review Period
This provision mandates that the Attorney General must expeditiously submit a report detailing the terms of any "covered settlement" to both Houses of Congress while they are in session. Following this report, Congress has a 60-day period during which a joint resolution approving the settlement must be enacted for the settlement to proceed. If no such resolution is enacted within 60 days, the settlement is not approved.
Section 2, amending 28 U.S.C. 2414(g)
Definition of "Covered Settlement"
This provision defines a "covered settlement" as any compromise settlement arising from imminent litigation or a lawsuit initiated by the President or a former President against the United States, or against its agencies or officials, concerning obligations or liabilities of the United States. This narrow definition specifies the exact scope of settlements that will be subject to the new congressional approval process.
The bill specifically defines "covered settlement" to apply only to compromise settlements for defense of imminent litigation or suits by the President or a former President against the United States or its agencies/officials.
Section 2, amending 28 U.S.C. 2414(g)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for definitions, but its placement at the very end of the amended section means its restrictive nature might not be immediately apparent to a casual reader.
Case for: Supporters would argue that this precise definition ensures the bill targets specific, high-stakes situations involving the highest office, where public trust and potential conflicts of interest are paramount, without unduly burdening other government settlements.
Case against: Critics might argue that the narrow focus could be perceived as politically motivated, targeting specific individuals or administrations rather than addressing broader issues of government settlement transparency.
Estimated impact: Significantly narrows the applicability of the new congressional approval process to a very specific and potentially rare class of settlements.