PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 405.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 5, 2002
Anti-Terrorism Explosives Act of 2002 - Rewrites Federal criminal code provisions regarding the purchase of explosives to prohibit the transport, shipment, or receipt of explosive materials without a Federal license, user permit, or limited permit. (Current law regulates such activities only to the extent that they occur in interstate or foreign commerce and includes exceptions such as for contiguous State transactions, and makes no mention of a limited permit.)Allows a limited permit purchaser to buy explosive materials only four times in any 12-month period.Requires employers who apply for licenses and user permits or limited permits to provide the names and appropriate identifying information regarding all employees who will be authorized by the employer to possess explosive materials, as well as fingerprints and a photograph of each responsible persons. Directs the Secretary to determines whether explosives possession by the responsible person or the employee would be lawful or unlawful, and to take specified actions.Expands the list of persons prohibited from receiving or possessing explosive materials to include aliens other than lawful permanent resident aliens, persons dishonorably discharged from the armed forces, and individuals who have renounced their U.S. citizenship.Requires licensed manufacturers, licensed importers, and those who manufacture or import explosive materials or ammonium nitrate to furnish samples and relevant information when required by the Secretary.Sets penalties for the destruction of property of institutions receiving Federal financial assistance.
People & committees
Rep. Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [R-WI-9] · 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. 405.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 107-658.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 107-658.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
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: 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.4864 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.4864 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.4864 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.4864 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.