1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Grand Jury Reform Act of 2017 . 2. Findings The Congress finds the following: (1) Grand juries are typically used as the process by which allegations of police misconduct are prosecuted. (2) There exists a symbiotic relationship between local prosecutors and the law enforcement officers who regularly testify in routine grand jury investigations. (3) The closeness of this relationship creates public suspicion that accused police officers receive preferential consideration from grand juries when they are subject to grand jury investigations. (4) Police officers have the right to appear before the grand jury investigating allegations of wrongdoing by said officer, and give testimony not subject to a thorough cross examination. (5) Grand jury proceedings are by law secret proceedings. (6) The secret grand jury process has historically resulted in a refusal to indict when the subject of their investigation is a local law enforcement officer. (7) The recent grand jury proceedings following the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner have followed historical tradition, ending with a refusal to indict the law enforcement officers involved in their deaths. (8) The American people have lost confidence in the secretive grand jury process when it is used to evaluate allegations of police misconduct. (9) The loss of confidence in our system of justice leads to the undermining of the principles of equality and justice upon which this country was founded. (10) Preliminary hearings are often replaced with direct presentments, whereby the prosecutor may send a case directly to the grand jury without a public preliminary hearing. 3. Hearing before a judge required (a) Receipt of grant funds In order for a State or unit of local government in a State to be eligible to receive Federal funding under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 ( 34 U.S.C. 10151 et seq.), the State shall comply with the requirements of this section. (b)