PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 25, 2015
Sensenbrenner-Scott Over-Criminalization Task Force Safe, Accountable, Fair, Effective Justice Reinvestment Act of 2015 or the Sensenbrenner-Scott SAFE Justice Reinvestment Act of 2015
This bill requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to: (1) compile and publish federal law violations with criminal penalties, (2) reduce over-federalization of criminal conduct and over-incarceration due to pretrial detention, (3) create a online complaint process to challenge prosecutions and (4) create training and best practices for prosecutors and law enforcement officers that reduce the inaccuracy and unreliability of evidence in criminal cases.
It prohibits sentencing courts from considering defendant's acquitted conduct and grants discretion to disregard manipulated conduct involving the Controlled Substances Act.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
It reauthorizes the Innocence Protection Act of 2001 for FY2016-FY2021.
The bill expands pre-judgment probation, safety valve, and compassionate release eligibility.
It creates problem-solving courts, establishes a presumption of probation for certain non-violent first-time offenders, and limits prior drug offenses that trigger enhanced mandatory minimum prison terms.
It limits application of drug offense mandatory minimums to drug trafficking organization leaders, organizers, or employees. (Drug offenses include unlawful import, export, manufacture, or distribution of, or possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance.)
It also reduces from life to 35 years the maximum mandatory minimum for certain drug offenses.
The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 applies retroactively to permit resentencing of a convicted crack cocaine offender sentenced before August 3, 2010.
DOJ must develop a post-sentencing risk and needs assessment system.
The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) must provide residential substance abuse treatment to all eligible offenders.
The bill establishes a standardized graduated sanctioning system for supervised release or probation violations. It eliminates mandatory revocation for certain minor violations and creates a performance-incentive funding program for judicial districts.
BOP may grant 54 days of good time credit regardless of satisfactory GED progress. Probation officers may award positive reinforcement (e.g. discharge credits) for compliance with terms of supervision.
The bill adds one non-voting, public defender member to the U.S. Sentencing Commission.
People & committees
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-5] · R–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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.2944 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.2944 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.2944 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.2944 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.