PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 699.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Dec 23, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Criminal Code Improvement Act of 2015
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the federal criminal code to establish a default mens rea standard (i.e., a state of mind requirement) for a federal criminal offense whose defining statute does not specify a required state of mind. A conviction for such federal criminal offense requires proof that a defendant acted knowingly.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, if the offense consists of conduct that a reasonable person would not know or have reason to believe was unlawful, then a conviction requires proof that the defendant knew or had reason to believe such conduct was unlawful.
The bill establishes definitions for the terms "state" and "serious bodily injury" that are generally applicable with respect to federal criminal law. It eliminates various repeated definitions of such terms.
(Sec. 5) It eliminates references to the Canal Zone (i.e., the Panama Canal Zone).
(Sec. 6) The bill amends the federal judicial code to require the Department of Justice to develop and update, index, and publish an inventory of all federal criminal offenses, including violations of agency rules or regulations that constitute or define federal criminal offenses.
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.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 699.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-889.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-889.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Discharged.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
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: Apr 7, 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.4002 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.4002 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.4002 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.4002 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.