PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 18, 2012
Protecting Victims on Campus Act of 2012 - Amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to revise provisions that require each institution of higher education (IHE) participating in a title IV (Student Assistance) program to comply with certain crime reporting requirements.
Requires IHEs to provide students and employees with a list of the titles, in each department of the IHE, of each individual who is a campus security authority to whom they should report specified criminal offenses.
Includes criminal offenses involving minors that are reported to campus security authorities or the local police among the criminal offenses that are to be included in: (1) the annual campus security report provided to current and prospective students and employees, and (2) the timely reports to the campus community on crimes considered to be a threat to the community.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the personally identifiable information of victims to be kept confidential when IHEs are making timely reports to the campus community on crimes considered to be a threat to the community.
Requires IHEs, in carrying out their obligation to make such timely reports, to: (1) designate an individual to serve as campus security authority coordinator, and (2) provide for the training of that coordinator and the campus security authorities.
Directs the Secretary of Education, when imposing civil penalties on IHEs for substantial violations of the crime reporting requirements, to distinguish between IHEs that intentionally violated those requirements and those whose violations are attributable to institutional neglect.
Requires the Secretary to provide each IHE that is to be investigated for violating such reporting requirements with a timeline of the investigation and a preliminary report that includes the reasons for the investigation.
People & committees
Rep. Meehan, Patrick [R-PA-7] · R–PA
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 Higher Education and Workforce Training.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. 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.5844 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.5844 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.5844 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.5844 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.