Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for co…
This bill amends section 222 of the Communications Act to require providers of covered services (commercial mobile service and IP‑enabled voice) to promptly provide available device location information to law enforcement officers or PSAP employees in emergencies. Requests qualify if the device placed a 9‑1‑1 call in the prior 48 hours or an officer has reasonable suspicion the device is with someone involved in an emergency risking death or serious physical harm.
Progressives stress privacy, oversight, and limiting "reasonable suspicion".
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear statutory intervention that establishes new mandatory disclosure duties for covered service providers in narrowly defined emergency circumstances and integrates those duties into existing statutory frameworks, but it stops short of providing the detailed operational, fiscal, and oversight provisions that would facilitate uniform, auditable implementation.
This bill amends section 222 of the Communications Act to require providers of covered services (commercial mobile service and IP‑enabled voice) to promptly provide available device location information to law enforcement officers or PSAP employees in emergencies.
Requests qualify if the device placed a 9‑1‑1 call in the prior 48 hours or an officer has reasonable suspicion the device is with someone involved in an emergency risking death or serious physical harm.
Agencies must keep a record of requests; providers are shielded from civil or administrative liability for complying.
Technically narrow and safety‑oriented, increasing chance; privacy objections and Senate hurdles reduce overall likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear statutory intervention that establishes new mandatory disclosure duties for covered service providers in narrowly defined emergency circumstances and integrates those duties into existing statutory frameworks, but it stops short of providing the detailed operational, fiscal, and oversight provisions that would facilitate uniform, auditable implementation.
Progressives stress privacy, oversight, and limiting "reasonable suspicion".
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives stress privacy, oversight, and limiting "reasonable suspicion".
Likely supportive of narrow emergency access that can save lives, but concerned about privacy and civil liberties.
Worries focus on the vagueness of "reasonable suspicion," the 48‑hour window, and the bill's broad "hold harmless" language.
Would favor amendments adding oversight, auditability, transparency, and limits on data retention and use.
Views the bill as a pragmatic, narrowly tailored emergency exception balancing public safety and privacy.
Appreciates recordkeeping and state‑law preservation, while wanting clearer procedural safeguards and guidance to prevent misuse.
Probably supports the measure with minor amendments for oversight and clarity.
Generally favorable, emphasizing enhanced public safety and removal of provider liability obstacles.
Sees the bill as a limited, pragmatic tool for saving lives and supporting law enforcement.
Minor concerns may center on federal preemption of state flexibility, but the bill preserves state‑law compliance.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and safety‑oriented, increasing chance; privacy objections and Senate hurdles reduce overall likelihood.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives stress privacy, oversight, and limiting "reasonable suspicion".
Technically narrow and safety‑oriented, increasing chance; privacy objections and Senate hurdles reduce overall likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clear statutory intervention that establishes new mandatory disclosure duties for covered service providers in narrowly defined emergency circumstances and integ…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.