S. 736 (119th)Bill Overview

Lieutenant Osvaldo Albarati Stopping Prison Contraband Act

Crime and Law Enforcement|Correctional facilities and imprisonmentCrime and Law Enforcement
Cosponsors
Support
Lean Republican
Introduced
Feb 26, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill amends 18 U.S.C. 1791 to increase criminal penalties for providing a prohibited phone in a correctional facility, adding a penalty of up to two years imprisonment for that offense. It also requires the Bureau of Prisons Director to review and update BOP policies within one year regarding inmates who make, possess, obtain, or attempt to obtain prohibited objects, and to improve protections for incarcerated people and staff.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize incarceration risks and enforcement disparities

Watch point

Narrow, low-cost public-safety bill likely to attract bipartisan support; few partisan policy flashpoints.

This bill amends 18 U.S.C. 1791 to increase criminal penalties for providing a prohibited phone in a correctional facility, adding a penalty of up to two years imprisonment for that offense.

It also requires the Bureau of Prisons Director to review and update BOP policies within one year regarding inmates who make, possess, obtain, or attempt to obtain prohibited objects, and to improve protections for incarcerated people and staff.

Passage70/100

Small, targeted criminal-law tweak plus administrative review has low fiscal burden and broad appeal, improving chances absent external political obstacles.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention55/100

Progressives emphasize incarceration risks and enforcement disparities

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Federal agenciesFederal agencies · Families

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesStronger statutory penalties may deter smuggling and provision of contraband phones into federal prisons.
  • Potential benefitReduced illicit communications could lower coordinated criminal activity originating from inside prisons.
  • Potential benefitMandated BOP policy review may produce updated procedures, training, and operational safeguards for staff and inmates.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesHigher criminal penalties could increase federal prison sentences and modestly raise incarceration numbers.
  • FamiliesFamily members or visitors who inadvertently supply devices may face stiffer criminal consequences.
  • Potential burdenImplementing and enforcing the changes could increase administrative and prosecutorial workload and costs.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize incarceration risks and enforcement disparities
Progressive45%

Mixed view: supports staff and inmate safety goals but wary of increasing criminal penalties and expanding incarceration.

Wants safeguards against disproportionate enforcement and clear limits on prosecutorial discretion.

Split reaction
Centrist70%

Generally favorable but cautious: recognizes need to prevent contraband phones while wanting proportionality and clear implementation.

Supports the BOP policy review as a practical step.

Leans supportive
Conservative85%

Supportive: views tougher penalties as necessary deterrence against contraband that facilitates crime.

Favors protecting staff and public safety and supports BOP strengthening policies.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood70/100

Small, targeted criminal-law tweak plus administrative review has low fiscal burden and broad appeal, improving chances absent external political obstacles.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Exact object covered by reference to 1791(d)(1)(F) is not described in the bill text
  • Absent cost estimate for BOP review and any follow-on implementation
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize incarceration risks and enforcement disparities

Small, targeted criminal-law tweak plus administrative review has low fiscal burden and broad appeal, improving chances absent external pol…

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Lieutenant Osvaldo Albarati Stopping Prison Contraband Act.

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis