PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 23, 2024
Stop Campus Hazing Act
This act requires institutions of higher education (IHEs) that participate in federal student aid programs to report hazing incidents. It also renames the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act as the Jeanne Clery Campus Safety Act.
Specifically, the act requires each IHE to disclose hazing incidents that were reported to campus security authorities or local police agencies in its annual security report. The act defines the term hazing to mean any intentional, knowing, or reckless act committed by a person (whether individually or in concert with other persons) against another person or persons regardless of the willingness of such other person or persons to participate, that (1) is committed in the course of an initiation into, an affiliation with, or the maintenance of membership in, a student organization (e.g., a club, athletic team, fraternity, or sorority); and (2) causes or creates a risk, above the reasonable risk encountered in the course of participation in the IHE or the organization, of physical or psychological injury.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Additionally, each IHE must include in its annual security report (1) a statement of current policies relating to hazing, how to report hazing incidents, the process used to investigate hazing incidents, and information on applicable laws on hazing; and (2) a statement of policy regarding prevention and awareness programs relating to hazing that includes a description of prevention programs.
Further, an IHE must develop a campus hazing transparency report that summarizes findings concerning any student organization found to be in violation of the IHE's standards of conduct relating to hazing. An IHE is not required to develop or update this report unless the IHE has a finding of a hazing violation.
The act does not apply to foreign IHEs.
People & committees
Rep. McBath, Lucy [D-GA-7] · D–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 118-173.
Became Public Law No: 118-173.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6976)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H5707-5708)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5707-5708)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5646.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5707-5713)
Mr. Owens moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 28 - 2.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.5646 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.5646 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.5646 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.5646 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.