Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill amends 18 U.S.C. §1801 to broaden federal reach over video voyeurism and increase criminal penalties. It adds a new subsection defining circumstances that create federal jurisdiction, largely tied to interstate or foreign commerce.
Victim protection versus federal overreach concerns
Narrow criminal-law change with low controversy; likely to attract bipartisan support though some will oppose federalization.
This bill amends 18 U.S.C. §1801 to broaden federal reach over video voyeurism and increase criminal penalties.
It adds a new subsection defining circumstances that create federal jurisdiction, largely tied to interstate or foreign commerce.
The bill raises the maximum imprisonment from one year to five years and explicitly includes special maritime and territorial jurisdiction.
A narrow, low-cost criminal-privacy expansion with bipartisan potential but hindered by federalism concerns and Senate procedural barriers.
How solid the drafting looks.
Victim protection versus federal overreach concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Victim protection versus federal overreach concerns
Likely supportive because it strengthens criminal penalties and closes interstate prosecution gaps for nonconsensual explicit recordings.
Sees this as protecting victims of revenge porn and online exploitation.
Would want assurances about victim services and safeguards against uneven enforcement.
Generally favorable to clarifying federal jurisdiction for interstate incidents while cautious about expanding federal criminal law.
Values better tools for prosecutors but wants precise language and cost/accountability measures.
Would seek compromise language addressing definitions and federal-state balance.
Likely skeptical due to expanded federal jurisdiction and stiffer penalties for offenses traditionally handled by states.
Supportive of protecting victims, but concerned about federal overreach, vague interstate triggers, and heavier incarceration.
Prefers state-led solutions and clearer limits on federal power.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
A narrow, low-cost criminal-privacy expansion with bipartisan potential but hindered by federalism concerns and Senate procedural barriers.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Victim protection versus federal overreach concerns
A narrow, low-cost criminal-privacy expansion with bipartisan potential but hindered by federalism concerns and Senate procedural barriers.
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Stop VOYEURS Act of 2025.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.