New Federal Board to Investigate All Police Shootings and Custody Deaths, Ties State Funding to Court Use of Findings

The National Police Misuse of Force Investigation Board Act of 2025 establishes a powerful, independent federal agency—the National Police Misuse of Force Investigation Board—tasked with investigating every death, officer-involved shooting, and incident causing severe bodily injury while someone is in police custody (Sec. 9). The goal is to create a dedicated, expert federal body that can conduct thorough, non-local investigations and issue mandatory recommendations to curb excessive force. This is a massive shift, setting up a federal watchdog with subpoena power and the ability to dictate procedural changes down to the local level.

The New Federal Watchdog: Who They Are and What They Do

This new Board will be led by eight members, appointed by the President and approved by the Senate, with a requirement that at least half of them have expertise in areas like civil rights law, psychology, and conflict resolution (Sec. 2). They aren't just looking into individual incidents; they are required to publish recommendations on how to prevent similar events from happening again, suggesting changes to everything from police procedures to the types of gear departments use (Sec. 6). Think of it like the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), but for police violence—they figure out what went wrong and how to fix the system.

To make sure investigations are thorough, the Board can compel witnesses to testify and demand evidence (Sec. 4). They also have the sole authority to decide how weapons testing is done and can order autopsies necessary for the investigation (Sec. 10). For people living in states far from regional offices—specifically those over 1,000 miles away—the Board must station at least one full-time employee there to ensure rapid initial response to incidents, which should speed up the start of investigations in remote areas (Sec. 4).

Mandatory Support for Families, But Limits on Lawsuits

One of the most immediate, human-centered changes in this bill is the mandated support structure for civilians and their families impacted by these serious incidents (Sec. 12). If the Board investigates, the Chairman must designate a staff member and an independent, non-profit organization to provide mental health, counseling, and emotional support services. This support must be provided immediately and cannot be obstructed by state or local authorities for at least 30 days. This means that if the worst happens, families will have federally mandated trauma support right away.

However, the bill introduces a significant restriction that could affect accountability in civil court. Section 15 states that no part of the Board's investigation report can be used as evidence in a civil lawsuit seeking damages. So, while the Board’s findings might influence policy, a victim or their family suing for wrongful death or injury cannot use the official federal report to prove their case in court. Furthermore, the bill severely restricts the discovery of police body camera or vehicle camera footage in court cases, only allowing a judge to release it if it's deemed “absolutely necessary” for a fair trial.

The Federal Funding Hammer: Compliance or Cuts

Perhaps the biggest change for state and local governments is the condition placed on federal crime-fighting grants (Sec. 17). To receive funds under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, states must pass laws allowing the Board's findings and recommendations to be used as evidence—and shown to a jury—in both criminal and civil court cases involving an officer's use of force.

If a state or local government fails to comply with this requirement, the Attorney General has the power to cut their federal grant funding by 1% to 10%. This is a huge incentive structure: comply with federal standards on accountability or face losing crucial money for local law enforcement programs. Any funds withheld from non-compliant states will be redistributed to those states that are following the new rules. This provision essentially federalizes a key aspect of evidence admissibility in local courts, a major shift in how police accountability is handled across the country.