PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 10, 2010
Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Registry Act of 2010 or the SAFER Act of 2010 - Amends the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 to: (1) allow states or local governments to use grant funds under such Act to conduct audits of samples of sexual assault evidence that are awaiting testing; and (2) provide funding in FY2011-FY2014 for such purpose. Authorizes the Attorney General to award grants for such audits only if the grant recipient (i.e., a state or local government) submits a plan for performing the audit of samples of sexual assault evidence and includes a good-faith estimate of the number of such samples.
Requires the Attorney General to: (1) establish a Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence Registry to include information about samples of sexual assault evidence awaiting testing and to track the testing and processing of such samples; and (2) develop and disseminate to law enforcement and other appropriate agencies a report on best practices for the testing and use of DNA evidence collected as part of a criminal investigation of sexual assault cases. Sets forth requirements relating to information required to be included in such Registry, the protection of personally identifiable information in the Registry, and the updating of information in the Registry.
Expresses the sense of Congress that law enforcement agencies and other appropriate entities should use the best practices developed by the Attorney General to develop, evaluate, and improve DNA evidence protocols.
People & committees
Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-14] · D–NY
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 Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1555)
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: Aug 14, 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.6085 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.6085 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.6085 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.6085 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.