4 versions

CosmeticWhat changed in REFERRED IN SENATEcompared with ENGROSSED IN HOUSE (May 14, 2026)

Technical corrections only. The changes between v3 and v4 reflect the procedural movement of the bill from the House of Representatives to the Senate, including updated attestations and referral information. No substantive policy changes were made to the bill's text.

H.R. 6260119th CongressIntroduced Nov 21, 2025

Keeping Violent Offenders Off Our Streets Act of 2025

Passed HouseCrime and Law EnforcementSubstantive

View bill text

Sponsor: Rep. Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5]
Committees: Judiciary Committee (primary)
Last action: May 18, 2026

Bottom line

This bill strengthens federal prohibitions against fraud by explicitly extending them to various forms of bail and bail bonds, aiming to prevent fraudulent schemes within the bail system.

What it actually does

This bill amends Section 1033(f)(1)(A) of Title 18, United States Code, to explicitly include "the posting of monetary bail, criminal bail bonds, and Federal immigration bail bonds" within the scope of prohibited fraud. This clarification ensures that fraudulent activities related to these specific types of bail are unequivocally covered under federal law, providing clear grounds for federal prosecution.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue this bill closes a potential loophole in federal fraud statutes by explicitly listing different forms of bail, ensuring that individuals who commit fraud in connection with posting bail, including monetary bail, criminal bail bonds, and federal immigration bail bonds, can be prosecuted under existing federal law. They contend it is a necessary measure to protect the integrity of the justice system and prevent violent offenders from exploiting fraudulent schemes to avoid detention.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that existing federal fraud statutes are already broad enough to cover fraudulent activities related to bail, making this amendment largely redundant or an unnecessary expansion of federal jurisdiction into areas traditionally handled by state law. Some may also express concern that it could lead to over-federalization of minor offenses or disproportionately impact certain communities.

The bill text is exceptionally short and can be read in under a minute, making it highly accessible for public review.

Section 2

Clarification of Fraud in Connection with Posting Bail

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section amends a specific part of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, Section 1033(f)(1)(A), which deals with fraud. It adds a phrase to explicitly state that the prohibition against fraud includes "the posting of monetary bail, criminal bail bonds, and Federal immigration bail bonds." This means that any fraudulent activity related to these specific types of bail or bonds would clearly fall under federal fraud statutes, aiming to ensure that such actions are prosecutable at the federal level.

GroupImpactMechanismScale

GroupIndividuals attempting to commit fraud in the bail systemImpactIncreased risk of federal prosecutionMechanismExplicit inclusion of bail types under federal fraud statuteScalePotentially nationwide, targeting specific fraudulent actors

GroupBail bond industryImpactIncreased scrutiny and potential for federal oversight in cases of fraudMechanismClarified federal jurisdiction over bail bond fraudScaleIndustry-wide, affecting practices related to fraud prevention

GroupFederal prosecutors and law enforcementImpactClarified legal authority and tools to prosecute bail-related fraudMechanismExplicit statutory languageScaleEnhanced enforcement capabilities

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this clarification is vital to ensure that all forms of bail-related fraud are unequivocally covered by federal law, preventing criminals from exploiting ambiguities to facilitate the release of violent offenders or engage in financial schemes. It strengthens the tools available to federal authorities to combat corruption and maintain public safety.

Critics contend

Critics might contend that the existing federal fraud statutes are already broad enough to encompass these activities, making this amendment largely symbolic or redundant. They may argue that it represents an unnecessary federal intrusion into areas traditionally governed by state law, potentially leading to over-prosecution or dual prosecution for offenses that could be handled locally.

Tradeoffs

The bill balances the desire for comprehensive federal oversight of fraud against concerns about federal overreach into areas traditionally managed by state criminal justice systems. It aims to close perceived loopholes but might be seen as duplicative by those who believe existing law is sufficient.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.