The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 5617·119th Congress·Introduced Sep 30, 2026

Combating Critical Infrastructure Vandalism Act of 2026

IntroducedCrime and Law EnforcementSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO]
Committees
Judiciary Committee (primary)
Last action
Sep 30, 2026

Bottom line

The bill strengthens federal law enforcement's ability to prosecute the theft of telecommunications infrastructure by explicitly adding it to existing federal vandalism statutes, while excluding customer-owned equipment.

What it actually does

This bill amends section 1362 of title 18, United States Code, to explicitly criminalize the theft of copper, fiber, or coaxial cables used to provide telecommunications and information services. It expands the existing federal statute, which previously covered only injury or destruction, to include stealing these critical infrastructure components. The bill also clarifies that this new prohibition does not apply to customer premises equipment.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue that this bill is a necessary response to the growing problem of cable theft, which causes significant service disruptions, economic losses for providers, and potential safety hazards. They contend that explicitly including theft under federal law, particularly for infrastructure affecting interstate commerce, provides a clearer and more robust tool for federal authorities to combat organized theft rings and protect essential communication services.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that existing state and local laws already adequately cover theft and property damage, and that expanding federal jurisdiction into these areas could lead to an unnecessary federalization of crimes traditionally handled at the local level. However, given the specific focus on critical infrastructure and interstate commerce, strong organized opposition to this particular measure is not widely anticipated.

The bill is very short and straightforward, making it easy for an informed reader to understand its provisions quickly.

Section 2(2)(A)(iv), adding subsection (a)(2) to 18 U.S.C. 1362

Criminalization of Theft for Telecommunications Cables

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision expands the existing federal law that prohibits willful or malicious injury or destruction of communication lines to now explicitly include the act of 'stealing' any copper, fiber, or coaxial cable. This applies to cables used for telecommunications or information services that are involved in or affect interstate or foreign commerce, whether they are already installed or under construction. This change provides federal prosecutors with a specific statute to address the theft of these materials.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupPerpetrators of cable theftImpactNegative, increased legal risk and federal prosecutionMechanismExpansion of federal criminal statute to include theftScaleIndividual to organized crime
GroupTelecommunications and information service providersImpactPositive, enhanced protection for infrastructureMechanismStronger federal deterrence and enforcement against theftScaleIndustry-wide
GroupConsumers of telecommunications and information servicesImpactPositive, potentially reduced service disruptionsMechanismProtection of underlying infrastructure leading to more reliable serviceScaleWidespread

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that explicitly criminalizing the theft of these cables at the federal level is crucial because such theft often involves organized rings and impacts critical infrastructure that serves interstate commerce. This provision provides a necessary tool to deter and prosecute those who disrupt essential communication services for profit.

Critics contend

While direct opposition is limited, some might argue that existing state laws already cover theft, and that adding a federal layer could lead to overlapping jurisdiction without significantly improving deterrence. However, the specific focus on critical infrastructure and interstate commerce provides a strong rationale for federal involvement.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances the need for robust protection of critical infrastructure against potential concerns about federalizing crimes traditionally handled by state and local authorities. It aims to address a specific type of theft with significant societal impact.

Section 2(3), adding subsection (b)(2) to 18 U.S.C. 1362

Exclusion of Customer Premises Equipment

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This provision clarifies that the new federal prohibition against injuring, destroying, or stealing telecommunications cables does not apply to 'customer premises equipment.' This term is defined as equipment physically located on a customer's property that is owned, rented, or leased by the customer. Essentially, it ensures that the federal law targets infrastructure theft rather than the theft of personal devices like a home internet router.

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.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this