Roughtly a dozen proposals to improve the legal system are up for review, and comments will be accepted on them until Feb. 16. (iStock.com)
The draft proposals emerged after extensive discussion and research by judges, lawyers and academics who sit on the advisory committees, which specialize in appellate, bankruptcy, civil, criminal and evidentiary issues. All the proposals won approval for publication at a June meeting of the Judicial Conference's top rulemaking panel.
In addition to soliciting written feedback, the committees will each hold a pair of virtual public hearings in early 2026 regarding their respective proposals; those hearings are distinct from each committee's regular meetings. Here's a quick look at the hearing information and key proposals in all five areas.
Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules
The most prominent of the proposals is Federal Rule of Evidence 707, an entirely new section focused on testimony derived from artificial intelligence. The proposal reflects concerns that AI-derived evidence — often called "machine-generated evidence" — might avoid Federal Rule of Evidence 702
, which contains a four-prong test to ensure human experts are helpful and reliable."More than really anything the committee has done in years, this is getting a lot of public attention, and we would anticipate, therefore, that we would get a lot of public comment on it," U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York, who has chaired the evidence panel, said in June.
The draft version of Rule 707 is only two sentences long and reads, "When machine-generated evidence is offered without an expert witness and would be subject to Rule 702 if testified to by a witness, the court may admit the evidence only if it satisfies the requirements of Rule 702(a)-(d). This rule does not apply to the output of simple scientific instruments."
Separately, the committee is seeking comments on changes to Federal Rule of Evidence 609
, which governs so-called impeachment of defendants — the term for attempting to cast doubt on a defendant's truthfulness.The main change would add the word "substantially" to Rule 609. If the addition is adopted, past convictions that don't involve dishonesty would generally be inadmissible unless the evidentiary value "substantially outweighs" any prejudicial effect.
Hearings are scheduled for Jan. 15 and Jan. 29.
Advisory Committee on Civil Rules
Two sets of revisions would affect parts of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45
, including Rule 45(b), which outlines how subpoenas are served. The goal is "to clarify the means of serving a subpoena," mainly because "courts have disagreed about whether the rule requires hand delivery," according to a committee note.The revised Rule 45(b) would also allow fees for certain witness expenses to be paid at the location where the witness is told to appear. An existing obligation to pay fees at the time of subpoena service "has in some cases further complicated the process of serving a subpoena, and this alternative should simplify the task," the committee note stated.
Tweaks to Rule 45(c) are also out for public comment. The tweaks address a Ninth Circuit ruling in 2023; that ruling limited judicial power to compel remote testimony from witnesses not residing within 100 miles or the same state.
Under the revision, "remote testimony occurs in the court where the trial or hearing is conducted," and judicial subpoena power "extends nationwide." Put simply, courts could compel someone to testify remotely from across the country, so long as the person doesn't have to travel too far to deliver the remote testimony.
Hearings are set for Jan. 13 and Jan. 27.
Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules
Among the existing rules with proposed amendments, few are facing makeovers more extensive and complex than Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17
, which also deals with subpoenas."The amendments to Rule 17 respond to gaps and ambiguities in its text that have contributed to conflicting interpretations in the courts and difficulties in application," a committee note explained. "The changes include revisions that clarify the procedures for subpoenas to produce data, objects or other items, and the availability of such subpoenas for proceedings other than trial, as well as revisions that delineate which provisions apply to certain types of subpoenas."
Hearings are scheduled Jan. 22 and Feb. 5.
Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules
A new subdivision in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15
is "designed to eliminate a procedural trap," per a committee note. At issue are petitions for court review of agency orders; in some circuits, those petitions can be treated as irredeemably premature if someone also petitions an agency for rehearing and isn't successful."In these circuits, if a party aggrieved by an agency action does not file a second timely petition for review after the petition for rehearing is denied by the agency, that party will find itself out of time," the committee note said. "Its first petition for review will be dismissed as premature, and the deadline for filing a second petition for review will have passed."
The new subdivision "removes this trap," the note added.
Hearings will occur Jan. 16 and Feb. 6.
Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules
Bankruptcy committee advisers are floating small changes to a pair of forms and one change to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2002
, which deals with certain notices. The Rule 2002 change would simplify notices by no longer requiring a few types of information, such as a debtor's taxpayer identification number and employer identification number.Hearings are set for Jan. 23 and Jan. 30.
--Editing by Dave Trumbore.
For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.
