To eliminate racial, religious, and other discriminatory profiling by law enforcement, and for other purposes.
Summary
What This Bill Does
The bill establishes key definitions for the Act including racial profiling, covered programs (Byrne JAG and COPS grants), law enforcement agency, hit rate, and routine investigatory activities, creates civil enforcement mechanism allowing individuals and the US government to sue law enforcement agencies for racial profiling, with disparate impact as prima facie evidence and attorney fee recovery for prevailing, and requires grant applicants under Byrne JAG and COPS programs to certify they have anti-profiling policies, training programs, data collection procedures, and participate in audit/complaint programs. It relies on reporting requirements, compliance mandates, grants, and appropriations. The main policy areas are Education, Technology, and Finance.
Who Benefits and How
Congress would be affected, State governments could gain revenue opportunities, and Local law enforcement agencies could gain revenue opportunities.
Who Bears the Burden and How
Department of Justice would take on compliance duties, Bureau of Justice Statistics would take on compliance duties, and State governments seeking federal law enforcement grants would take on compliance duties.
Key Provisions
- Establishes key definitions for the Act including racial profiling, covered programs (Byrne JAG and COPS grants), law enforcement agency, hit rate, and routine investigatory activities.
- Creates civil enforcement mechanism allowing individuals and the US government to sue law enforcement agencies for racial profiling, with disparate impact as prima facie evidence and attorney fee recovery for prevailing...
- Requires grant applicants under Byrne JAG and COPS programs to certify they have anti-profiling policies, training programs, data collection procedures, and participate in audit/complaint programs.
- Requires Attorney General to issue regulations for administrative complaint procedures and independent audits, with authority to withhold grant funds from non-compliant recipients.
- Authorizes Attorney General to make up to 5 competitive grants for 2-year demonstration project on hit rate data collection, with $5 million for the program and $500,000 for academic evaluation.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
The bill establishes key definitions for the Act including racial profiling, covered programs (Byrne JAG and COPS grants), law enforcement agency, hit rate, and routine investigatory activities, creates civil enforcement mechanism allowing individuals and the US government to sue law enforcement agencies for racial profiling, with disparate impact as prima facie evidence and attorney fee recovery for prevailing, and requires grant applicants under Byrne JAG and COPS programs to certify they have anti-profiling policies, training programs, data collection procedures, and participate in audit/complaint programs.
Key Policy Areas
Education, Technology, Finance
Primary Purpose
The bill establishes key definitions for the Act including racial profiling, covered programs (Byrne JAG and COPS grants), law enforcement agency, hit rate, and routine investigatory activities, creates civil enforcement mechanism allowing individuals and the US government to sue law enforcement agencies for racial profiling, with disparate impact as prima facie evidence and attorney fee recovery for prevailing, and requires grant applicants under Byrne JAG and COPS programs to certify they have anti-profiling policies, training programs, data collection procedures, and participate in audit/complaint programs.
Policy Domains
Title I - Grants for Innovative Learning Model Development and Research
Identified Gains
- Congress
- State governments
- Local law enforcement agencies
- Law enforcement officers
- Institutions of higher education conducting research
Identified Costs
- Department of Justice
- Bureau of Justice Statistics
- State governments seeking federal law enforcement grants
- Local governments seeking federal law enforcement grants
- Recipients of Byrne JAG and COPS grant funding
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
IntroducedMr. Cohen introduced the following bill; which was referred to …
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Attorney General, Complainants in racial profiling cases, FOIA requesters seeking officer identities
Positive-direction: Complainants in racial profiling cases, General public, Individuals subjected to racial profiling, Individuals whose data is collected during stops, Law enforcement officers, Racial and ethnic minority communities
Negative-direction: Attorney General, FOIA requesters seeking officer identities, Individual law enforcement officers, Law enforcement supervisors, Recipients of Byrne JAG and COPS grant funding, Taxpayers
Congress, Local governments seeking federal law enforcement grants, State governments
Positive-direction: Congress, State governments
Negative-direction: Local governments seeking federal law enforcement grants, State governments seeking federal law enforcement grants
Civil rights advocacy organizations, Civil rights organizations and researchers, Civil rights researchers and organizations
Institutions of higher education conducting research
Law enforcement training providers
Technology vendors for law enforcement data systems
Journalists and media organizations
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "the_director"
- → Director of the Institute of Education Sciences
- "the_secretary"
- → Secretary of Education
Key Definitions
Terms defined in this bill
A comprehensive program for K-12 schools that bundles together an interconnected set of tools, resources, systems, and instructional practices; integrates instructional design, pedagogical practices, operational design, and technological design; is not simply a technology platform; and may be designed for an entire school or focus on a specific subject or function.
An innovative learning model with statistically significant effects from experimental studies (strong evidence), quasi-experimental studies (moderate evidence), or correlational studies with controls (promising evidence), or a model with high-quality research rationale that is continuing to be evaluated.
An organization that designs innovative learning models and partners with schools to support implementation while sharing accountability for student outcomes.
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology