PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 329.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Mar 22, 2010
Witness Security and Protection Grant Program Act of 2010 - Directs the Attorney General to: (1) make competitive grants to state, tribal, and local governments to establish or maintain programs to protect or assist witnesses in court proceedings involving homicide, a serious felony or drug offense, or gangs or organized crime; (2) evaluate grant applicants based on specified criteria, including such government's level of witness intimidation and level of serious crimes; (3) provide technical assistance to grant applicants for establishing or maintaining a witness protection plan; and (4) develop and disseminate within one year after development best practice models to assist states and other relevant entities in addressing witness safety, short-term and permanent witness relocation, financial and housing assistance, and other necessary services.
Expresses the sense of Congress that states and relevant entities should use the best practice models developed by the Attorney General to evaluate, improve, and develop witness protection or witness assistance programs.
Requires the Attorney General to: (1) ensure that grants funds under this Act are equitably distributed throughout the United States and that due consideration is given to applicants of rural and urban communities; and (2) report to Congress not later than December 31, 2012, on the implementation of this Act and not later than December 31, 2015, on the programs funded by grants awarded by this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Cummings, Elijah E. [D-MD-7] · D–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 329.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 412 - 11 (Roll no. 315). (text: CR H6325-6326)
House roll call 315 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 412 - 11 (Roll no. 315).(text: CR H6325-6326)
House roll call 315 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6357)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1741.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6325-6329)
Mr. Johnson (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 70.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 111-138.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 111-138.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.1741 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.1741 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.1741 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.1741 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.