Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill directs the Attorney General, in consultation with HHS/SAMHSA, to collect annual data on law enforcement interactions with people with mental illness, create collection guidelines, publish an annual public summary to Congress, and authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 2026–2036. Data must be used only for research or statistical purposes and exclude information that could identify crime victims. "Mental illness" is defined by reference to an existing statute.
Liberals emphasize transparency and reform potential; conservatives emphasize federal overreach and police burden.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear statutory mandate for annual data acquisition and public reporting on law enforcement interactions with people with mental illness, assigns responsibility to the Attorney General with HHS consultation, and authorizes multi‑year appropriations.
The bill directs the Attorney General, in consultation with HHS/SAMHSA, to collect annual data on law enforcement interactions with people with mental illness, create collection guidelines, publish an annual public summary to Congress, and authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 2026–2036.
Data must be used only for research or statistical purposes and exclude information that could identify crime victims. "Mental illness" is defined by reference to an existing statute.
Modest chance: technically straightforward and research-focused, but federal‑local data authority and funding open it to pushback.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear statutory mandate for annual data acquisition and public reporting on law enforcement interactions with people with mental illness, assigns responsibility to the Attorney General with HHS consultation, and authorizes multi‑year appropriations. Its construction is functional for creating a reporting requirement but sparse on operational specifics.
Liberals emphasize transparency and reform potential; conservatives emphasize federal overreach and police burden.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize transparency and reform potential; conservatives emphasize federal overreach and police burden.
Likely supportive.
The bill creates a national dataset to study policing encounters involving people with mental illness, which advocates view as needed for accountability and better crisis response.
Supporters would see this as a tool to inform diversion, community services, and training reforms.
Cautiously supportive.
The bill promotes data-driven policy and interagency cooperation while respecting privacy.
Centrists will welcome research focus but seek clarity on cost, burden, interoperability with existing systems, and data standards.
Skeptical.
While research on mental-health-related policing may be acceptable in principle, conservatives will worry about federal overreach, added reporting burdens, and data being used to political ends against law enforcement.
They will press to limit federal intrusion, ensure strict privacy, and fully fund any new obligations.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest chance: technically straightforward and research-focused, but federal‑local data authority and funding open it to pushback.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize transparency and reform potential; conservatives emphasize federal overreach and police burden.
Modest chance: technically straightforward and research-focused, but federal‑local data authority and funding open it to pushback.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear statutory mandate for annual data acquisition and public reporting on law enforcement interactions with people with mental illness, assigns respon…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.