S-616-119
Became Public Law No: 119-57.
Sponsored by John Kennedy (R-LA)
What it does
This law amends the federal charter for the Foundation of the Federal Bar Association (a congressionally chartered nonprofit) in Title 36 of the U.S. Code. It removes outdated organizational requirements, gives the Foundation's board of directors and bylaws greater flexibility over membership rules, governance structure, and officer elections, allows the principal office to be located anywhere in the United States rather than only in Washington, D.C., and updates rules on service of process, asset distribution upon dissolution, and restrictions on political activity and loans.
Who benefits
The Foundation of the Federal Bar Association and its board of directors, who gain greater operational flexibility and reduced administrative constraints. Federal Bar Association chapters, which may now receive grants under clarified rules. Legal professionals who are members of the Foundation, who benefit from modernized governance. The Foundation's employees, whose compensation rights are explicitly protected.
Who is hurt
There are no clearly identifiable groups who are materially harmed by this law. Marginally, the change reduces congressional oversight of the Foundation's internal structure by deferring more decisions to the board and bylaws, which could reduce transparency for members who previously relied on statutory membership and governance rules.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the original charter contained rigid, outdated requirements — such as mandating a Washington, D.C. headquarters and prescribing specific membership and governance structures in statute — that unnecessarily constrained the Foundation's operations. They contend that modernizing the charter to defer these decisions to the board and bylaws is consistent with how other congressionally chartered nonprofits are governed, and that the retained restrictions on political activity, loans, and self-dealing adequately protect the public interest.
Opponents argue
Opponents could argue that moving governance details from statute into bylaws reduces the transparency and accountability that a congressional charter is meant to provide, since bylaws can be changed by the board without an act of Congress. They contend that the original statutory specificity served as a check on the Foundation's leadership, and that loosening those requirements — even for a small nonprofit — sets a precedent of weakening congressional oversight of federally chartered organizations.