PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 28, 2018
PreCheck is PreCheck Act of 2018
This bill directs the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to ensure that only travelers who are members of a trusted traveler program are permitted to use TSA PreCheck security screening lanes at TSA checkpoints.
Any traveler under the age of 12 or over the age of 75 who is not a member of a trusted traveler program shall be permitted to utilize PreCheck security screening lanes at TSA checkpoints when traveling on the same reservation as a member of a trusted traveler program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The TSA shall implement a risk modified screening protocol for lanes other than designated TSA PreCheck security screening lanes at TSA checkpoints to further segment passengers based on risk. Only low-risk passengers shall be eligible to undergo risk modified screening at TSA checkpoints.
The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security must assess whether there has been a systematic pattern of violations of the use of TSA PreCheck security screening lanes at TSA checkpoints during the previous calendar year.
The TSA shall complete the implementation of a long-term strategy to increase enrollment in the TSA PreCheck Program and expand the total population of members of trusted traveler programs.
People & committees
Rep. Katko, John [R-NY-24] · R–NY
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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 H7807-7809)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7807-7809)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6265.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR S7807-7809)
Mr. Katko moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 708.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-912.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 115-912.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Protective Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
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: Sep 8, 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.6265 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.6265 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.6265 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.6265 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.