QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Federal courts just got $75,000 more expensive to access

S. 4850 — Diversity Jurisdiction Inflation Adjustment Act · Filed by John Kennedy (R-LA) · 4 cosponsors · Introduced Jun 22, 2026 · Passed chamber

72%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
25/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Access-Restricting Procedural Reform

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This bill adjusts the minimum dollar amount required to file certain civil lawsuits in federal court (called 'diversity jurisdiction') to account for inflation. Currently set at $75,000, the threshold will rise to $150,000 starting January 1, 2030, then automatically adjust every 10 years based on the Consumer Price Index. The bill also allows federal judges to penalize plaintiffs who recover less than the new threshold by denying them court costs or imposing costs against them.

Why we flagged it

The bill's functional effect is to raise the financial barrier for federal court access and impose penalties on unsuccessful plaintiffs. While framed as a technical inflation adjustment, the doubling of the threshold and automatic indexing mechanism systematically restrict citizen access to federal courts.

What the text implies

  • Doubling the threshold from $75,000 to $150,000 (not merely adjusting for inflation since 1996) creates a structural shift in federal court access that disproportionately affects smaller claims and lower-income litigants.
  • The cost-shifting provision (28 USC § 1332) penalizes plaintiffs who recover less than the threshold, creating a chilling effect on marginal claims even when the underlying dispute has merit.

The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

defendants in civil disputes (reduced federal court exposure); large corporations (higher threshold favors defendants in larger disputes); insurance companies (reduced federal litigation risk)

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record