House Passes Measures on Prison Staff Safety, Victim Protection, and Nondisclosure Orders; Designates National Mall Site for Medal of Honor Monument

The case for

Ms. Lee of Florida argued that correctional officers and BOP employees face inherently challenging and dangerous environments, and sexual harassment and assault should not be accepted as part of the job. She cited a Department of Justice survey finding that 40 percent of BOP employees reported experiencing sexual harassment or assault by an inmate, with 69 percent of female staff reporting such incidents. The bill aims to address these issues by requiring the DOJ Inspector General to conduct a comprehensive review of incidents and consequences, and for the Attorney General to establish national standards for prevention, reduction, and punishment. Mr. Raskin emphasized that federal prison staff protect public safety and prepare people for reentry, but often face threats of sexual harassment and assault. He noted the IG report found BOP's data collection inadequate and that the bill would require BOP to implement IG recommendations, provide updated data, and for the AG to adopt national standards, thereby improving safety and staff morale.

The case against

No opposition was aired in the Record, though 8 members voted nay.

The case for

Ms. Lee of Florida argued that the bill ensures victims of the most serious crimes do not have to live with the constant fear of contact from their offenders. She highlighted the case of Kayleigh Kozak, a survivor whose abuser attempted to terminate his probation, forcing her to seek a protective order and re-traumatizing her. The bill provides a "straightforward and commonsense solution" by authorizing lifetime no-contact orders for offenders convicted of serious federal violent, sexual, trafficking, and child exploitation offenses. This approach prevents victims from repeatedly returning to court and ensures lasting protection. Mr. Raskin supported the bill for strengthening protection for victims and survivors of domestic and sexual violence, noting that it empowers them to feel safer and move forward. Mr. Hamadeh of Arizona, who introduced the bill in honor of Kayleigh Kozak, emphasized that no victim should be victimized twice, first by the criminal and then by a system that forces them to fight for protection repeatedly. He noted that Arizona's similar law has provided lifetime protection to over 1,000 survivors in its first year.

The case against

No opposition was aired in the Record.

The case for

Mr. Fitzgerald argued that the bill addresses the abuse and overuse of nondisclosure orders (NDOs), also known as secrecy orders, by law enforcement. He explained that current provisions in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act allow law enforcement to subpoena third-party service providers for an individual's data and impose indefinite secrecy orders, circumventing Fourth Amendment protections. He cited recent revelations of NDOs being used to prevent Members of Congress from being notified of phone record searches. The bill aims to stop this abuse by ending indefinite secrecy orders, requiring judicial certification based on specific facts for issuance and extensions, imposing a 90-day limit on orders (1 year for child pornography), and granting individuals the right to be heard and request a copy of disclosed information. Mr. Raskin supported the bill as addressing a "real flaw in government surveillance authorities" and safeguarding Americans' privacy and civil liberties. He noted that NDO requests have become a "simple box-checking exercise" and that the bill ensures judges apply strict scrutiny to these requests, limiting secrecy to cases where it is actually necessary for an investigation.

The case against

No opposition was aired in the Record.

The case for

Mr. Westerman emphasized that the bill honors Medal of Honor recipients, who represent the highest acts of valor, selflessness, and sacrifice in the nation's history. He noted that fewer than 70 recipients are alive today. Placing the monument on the National Mall, which receives 25 million visitors annually, is an "equally exceptional location" for these heroes and will serve as an everlasting reminder of the country's greatness. He highlighted the bill's namesake, Hershel "Woody" Williams, a World War II hero. Mr. Moore of Utah, the lead sponsor of the House companion bill, reiterated the importance of commemorating the bravery, humanity, patriotism, and sacrifice of Medal of Honor recipients, stating that this legislation is the "next and final step" to giving these heroes and their families the commemoration they deserve.

The case against

Mr. Huffman, while supporting the bill's core purpose, criticized the Senate for passing a version of the bill that the House had already passed in a previous Congress, calling it an "unsightly trend" that contributes to an unproductive Congress. He also used the opportunity to criticize the administration for allegedly ignoring the Commemorative Works Act by proceeding with an "enormous arc de Trump" in violation of the law, which he argued would tower over the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery.

The case for

Mr. Schmidt argued that U.S. trade policy is vital for protecting American businesses and workers, but is undermined by criminal enterprises, predominantly from China, engaging in financial fraud, counterfeiting, and forced labor. He cited instances of trade fraud depriving the U.S. of duties and undermining trade policy, and billions in seized counterfeit goods, with China accounting for over 75% of seizures. The bill aims to stop these harms by establishing a task force within the DOJ's Criminal Division with dedicated resources to investigate and prosecute trade crimes, including tariff evasion, illegal smuggling, and trade-based money laundering. Mrs. Hinson emphasized that the bill holds China accountable for decades of evading U.S. trade laws, which undercuts American wages and guts manufacturing towns. She cited examples of Chinese companies using transshipment to evade tariffs, leading to American job losses. Mr. Krishnamoorthi stated that the Chinese Communist Party has victimized American workers, companies, and consumers through trade crimes, and that the bill codifies the Trade Fraud Task Force and creates an oversight mechanism to combat these illegal practices.

The case against

No opposition was aired in the Record.

The case for

Mr. Schmidt argued that local access to federal courts is critical for protecting the rights of the people. He explained that residents in the Southern District of Texas and the Southern District of California often face long travel distances (100 miles or more) to reach federal courthouses, placing an unnecessary burden on litigants, jurors, and the public. The bill aims to alleviate this burden by adding College Station and El Centro as additional authorized locations for holding court in these districts, respectively. Mr. Raskin supported the bill, stating that access to justice should not depend on where one lives. He noted that long travel times and administrative expenses for court access are a problem in these growing districts, and that adding courthouses in existing judicial facilities is a cost-free step toward making justice more accessible. He highlighted the support of the Administrative Office of the Courts for this measure.

The case against

No opposition was aired in the Record, though 10 members voted nay.