PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 12, 2025
National Statistics on Deadly Force Transparency Act of 2025
This bill establishes a framework to require law enforcement agencies to collect data on the use of deadly force by law enforcement officers.
Specifically, it requires federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to collect, compile, and submit to the Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Bureau of Justice Statistics data on the use of deadly force by law enforcement officers.
DOJ must reduce by 10% the allocation of funds under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program for a state or local government that fails to substantially comply.
People & committees
Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] · D–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 1, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1240 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1240 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1240 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1240 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-12 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This bill would require nationwide data collection on every use of deadly force by federal, state, and local law enforcement officers. The information would describe the people involved and the circumstances, and would be shared with Congress and the public without personally identifying information. A state or local government that received an award under the specified Byrne JAG grant program and substantially failed to comply with section 2 during a fiscal year would face a 10 percent reduction in its otherwise available award under that program in the following fiscal year.
require the collection of data on all instances wherein deadly force was used by a Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer
shall provide to Congress and make available to the public the data collected pursuant to this Act, excluding any personally identifiable information described in section 4.
5. Byrne JAG grant reduced for failure to report In the case of a State or unit of local government that received a grant award under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.), if that State or unit of local government fails substantially to comply with the requirement under section 2 for a fiscal year, the Attorney General shall reduce the amount that would otherwise be awarded to that State or unit of local government under such grant program in the following fiscal year by 10 percent.
Within six months after enactment, the Attorney General would have to issue data collection regulations in consultation with stakeholders, including law enforcement agencies and community, professional, research, and civil rights organizations.
Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General, in consultation with stakeholders, including Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies and community, professional, research, and civil rights organizations, shall issue regulations for the collection and compilation of data pertaining to the use of deadly force by Federal, State, or local law enforcement officers.
The regulations would require data on every use of deadly force, including the race or ethnicity, gender, approximate age, and actual or perceived religious affiliation of both the officer and the person against whom force was used. Personally identifying information covered by section 4 would be excluded from the collected data.
(1) require the collection of data on all instances wherein deadly force was used by a Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer; (2) require that the data collected shall— (A) include identifying characteristics of the person who was the target of the use of deadly force and the officer who used deadly force, including— (i) race or ethnicity; (ii) gender; (iii) approximate age; and (iv) the actual or perceived religious affiliation;
(H) not include personally identifiable information described in section 4;
Each incident's data would include its date, time, and location; the alleged criminal activity of the person against whom force was used; and the type of deadly force used, including whether a firearm was used.
(B) include the date, time, and location of such use of deadly force; (C) include the alleged criminal activity of the person who was the target of the use of deadly force; (D) include the nature of the deadly force used, including the use of a firearm;
The data would also include the agency's explanation, if any, for using deadly force; a copy of any agency deadly force guidelines in effect at the time; and a description of nonlethal efforts used beforehand to apprehend or subdue the person.
(E) include an explanation, if any, from the relevant law enforcement agency on why deadly force was used; (F) include a copy of any use of deadly force guidelines in effect at the relevant law enforcement agency at the time deadly force was used; (G) include a description of any non-lethal efforts employed to apprehend or subdue the person who was the target of the use of deadly force before deadly force was used;
Law enforcement agencies would have to compile and submit the data using a standardized form. Submissions would go to the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics and any other department component selected by the Attorney General.
(3) provide that a standardized form shall be made available to law enforcement agencies for the submission of data collected pursuant to this Act to the Department of Justice; (4) require that law enforcement agencies compile data using the standardized form made available under paragraph (3), and submit the form to the Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics and any other component of the Department of Justice that the Attorney General determines appropriate;
Law enforcement agencies would have to retain all data collected under the bill for at least four years.
(5) require that law enforcement agencies shall maintain all data collected under this Act for not less than 4 years.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics would have to provide the collected data to Congress and make it publicly available, excluding personally identifying information protected by section 4.
The Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics shall provide to Congress and make available to the public the data collected pursuant to this Act, excluding any personally identifiable information described in section 4.
Names and identifying information about officers, people against whom deadly force was used, and other involved individuals could not be released publicly. Disclosure to any person would be allowed only when necessary to comply with the bill, when giving someone information about themselves, or pursuant to litigation.
The name or identifying information of a law enforcement officer, person who was the target of the use of deadly force, or any other individual involved in any activity for which data is collected and compiled under this Act shall not be— (1) released to the public; (2) disclosed to any person, except for— (A) such disclosures as are necessary to comply with this Act; (B) disclosures of information regarding a particular person to that person; or (C) disclosures pursuant to litigation;
The protected names and identifying information would also be excluded from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, except for disclosure of information about a person to that person.
The name or identifying information of a law enforcement officer, person who was the target of the use of deadly force, or any other individual involved in any activity for which data is collected and compiled under this Act shall not be—
(3) subject to disclosure under section 552 of title 5, United States Code (commonly known as the Freedom of Information Act), except for disclosures of information regarding a particular person to that person.
For a state or local government that received a grant under the specified Byrne JAG program, substantial failure to comply with section 2 during a fiscal year would require the Attorney General to cut the following fiscal year's otherwise available award under that program by 10 percent.
5. Byrne JAG grant reduced for failure to report In the case of a State or unit of local government that received a grant award under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.), if that State or unit of local government fails substantially to comply with the requirement under section 2 for a fiscal year, the Attorney General shall reduce the amount that would otherwise be awarded to that State or unit of local government under such grant program in the following fiscal year by 10 percent.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated April 1, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Judiciary Committee on February 12, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-04-01T19:45:57Z. 2025-02-12: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-02-12: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-12. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version, not other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit or special exemption was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version, not other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Apr 1, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI