PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Sep 11, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the House reported version is repeated here.)
Local Courthouse Safety Act of 2012 - (Sec. 2) Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to permit the Director of the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Bureau of Justice Assistance to carry out a training and technical assistance program to teach employees of state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies how to anticipate, survive, and respond to violent encounters during the course of their duties, including duties relating to security at state, county, and tribal courthouses.
Requires the Director to give preference for any courthouse security training program to employees of jurisdictions that have magnetometers available at their courthouses.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) Amends the State Justice Institute Act of 1984 to require the State Justice Institute (a private nonprofit organization established to improve judicial administration in state courts) to include courthouse safety as a factor in the national assistance program under which it provides funding to state courts and related national and nonprofit organizations. Permits state and local courts and other organizations awarded funds pursuant to Institute grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts to use such funds to improve safety and security in state and local courts.
Requires, if such a grant is awarded to state or local courts without magnetometers, that specified matching funds be used acquire a magnetometer.
(Sec. 4) Directs the Administrator of General Services (GSA) to ensure that state or local courthouses having less security equipment than such courthouses require have an opportunity to request surplus security equipment (metal detectors, wands, baggage screening devices) before such equipment is made available to any other individual or entity. Requires that priority be given to courthouses that have no security equipment.
People & committees
Rep. Adams, Sandy [R-FL-24] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
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 H5791-5792)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5791-5792)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6185.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5791-5793)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 478.
Committee on Oversight and Government discharged.
Committee on Oversight and Government discharged.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-661, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-661, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.6185 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.6185 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.6185 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.6185 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.