Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 11, 2012
No-Hassle Flying Act of 2012 - Authorizes the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration [TSA]) to determine whether checked baggage on a flight or flight segment originating at an airport outside the United States where U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has established preclearance operations must be re-screened in the United States for explosives before it can continue on any additional flight or flight segment.
Prohibits the Assistant Secretary from exercising this authority, however, unless an agreement is in effect between the United States and the flight originating country requiring implementation of security standards and protocols determined comparable to those of the United States and therefore sufficiently effective to enable passengers to deplane into sterile areas of U.S. airports.
Requires the Assistant Secretary to report annually to Congress on the re-screening of baggage.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.6028 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.6028 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.6028 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.6028 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.