PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 9, 2003
Antiterrorism Tools Enhancement Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to authorize a magistrate judge, at the request of a Federal law enforcement officer or attorney for the Government, to issue a warrant in an investigation of a Federal crime of terrorism or of specified offenses relating to information concerning such a crime (currently, in an investigation of domestic or international terrorism).
Authorizes the Attorney General, in any investigation concerning a Federal crime of terrorism, to subpoena witnesses, compel the attendance and testimony of witnesses, and require the production of records that he finds relevant or material to the investigation. Provides that the attendance of witnesses and the production of records may be required from any place subject to U.S. jurisdiction at any designated hearing place, except that a witness shall not be required to appear at any hearing more than 500 miles distant from the place where he was served with a subpoena.
Sets forth provisions regarding the service of subpoenas, enforcement of subpoenas, a nondisclosure requirement and its enforcement (if the Attorney General certifies that otherwise there may result a danger to national security), termination of such requirement, and judicial review.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Immunizes from civil liability any person who in good faith produces the records or items requested in a subpoena. Directs the Attorney General to issue guidelines to ensure the effective implementation of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Feeney, Tom [R-FL-24] · R–FL
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, and Homeland Security.
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 18, 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.3037 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.3037 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.3037 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.3037 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.