Community Risk Training and Response Act of 2026
Summary
What This Bill Does
The bill directs the Attorney General to award grants to states for one-year terms, with each grant at least $200,000 and not more than $500,000. Grant purposes are technical assistance to state and local law enforcement, prosecutors, judges and court staff, healthcare providers, educators, and agencies designated to coordinate implementation of extreme risk protection orders.
Who Benefits and How
States, law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, courts, healthcare providers, educators, and ERPO coordinating agencies benefit from federal technical-assistance funding for implementation capacity. Communities may benefit if ERPO processes are better coordinated across public safety, courts, schools, and healthcare settings.
Who Bears the Burden and How
The Justice Department must administer the grant program. States receiving funds must coordinate technical assistance across several professional groups during a one-year grant term and manage awards within the $200,000 to $500,000 range.
Key Provisions
- Requires Attorney General grants to states for one-year ERPO implementation technical-assistance projects.
- Sets each grant between $200,000 and $500,000.
- Authorizes assistance for law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, court staff, healthcare providers, educators, and ERPO coordinating agencies.
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
Requires the Attorney General to make one-year grants of $200,000 to $500,000 to states for technical assistance on extreme risk protection order implementation across law enforcement, courts, prosecutors, healthcare, education, and coordinating agencies.
Key Policy Areas
Public Safety, Law Enforcement, Healthcare
Primary Purpose
Requires the Attorney General to make one-year grants of $200,000 to $500,000 to states for technical assistance on extreme risk protection order implementation across law enforcement, courts, prosecutors, healthcare, education, and coordinating agencies.
Policy Domains
Substantive provisions
Identified Gains
- States
- Law enforcement agencies
- Prosecutors
- Courts
- Healthcare providers
- Educators
Identified Costs
- Justice Department
- States
- ERPO coordinating agencies
Legislative Progress
In CommitteeReferred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Ms. Pettersen introduced the following bill; which was referred to …
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Courts, Justice Department
Positive-direction: Courts
Negative-direction: Justice Department
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "attorney_general"
- → Attorney General
Key Definitions
Terms defined in this bill
A court order process for temporarily restricting firearm access by a person found to present a qualifying risk.
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