PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1701-1702)
Congressional Research Service
Version 20 · Reported to House amended, Part III · Sep 12, 1997
Security and Freedom Through Encryption (SAFE) Act - Amends the Federal criminal code to permit any person within any State and any U.S. person in a foreign country to use, and any person within any State to sell in interstate commerce, any encryption regardless of the encryption algorithm selected, encryption key length chosen, or implementation technique or medium used. Makes an exception for and prohibits knowingly and willfully encrypting incriminating communications or information relating to commission of a felony to conceal such information from law enforcement agencies. Specifies that no person in lawful possession of a key to encrypted communications or information may be required by Federal or State law to relinquish to another person control of that key, with an exception for access for law enforcement purposes. (Sec. 3) Grants the Secretary of Commerce, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Defense, authority to control the export of encryption products not controlled on the United States Munitions List. Declares that decisions by the Secretary regarding such exportation are not subject to judicial review. Makes encryption products with encryption strength equal to or less than the level identified in this section eligible for export under a license exception after a one-time review, if the encryption product being exported: (1) does not include features that would otherwise require licensing under applicable regulations; (2) is not destined for countries, end-users, or end-uses that the Secretary has determined, with the Defense Secretary's concurrence, are ineligible to receive such products; and (3) is otherwise qualified for export. Directs the President to notify the Congress annually of the maximum level of encryption strength that could be exported from the United States under license exception pursuant to this section without harm to U.S. national security. Bars such level from becoming effective until 60 days after such notification. (Sec. 4) Directs the Attorney General to compile, maintain in classified form, and make available to any Member of Congress, upon request, data on the instances in which encryption has interfered with, impeded, or obstructed the ability of the Department of Justice to enforce the U.S. criminal laws.
People & committees
Rep. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1701-1702)
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 160.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 105-108, Part V.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 105-108, Part V.
House Committee on Commerce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 29, 1997.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 44 - 6.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent). H. Rept. 105-108, Part IV.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent). H. Rept. 105-108, Part IV.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on National Security. H. Rept. 105-108, Part III.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on National Security. H. Rept. 105-108, Part III.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
House Committee on Commerce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 26, 1997.
House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 16, 1997.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Committee Hearings Held.
House Committee on Commerce Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 12, 1997.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
House Committee on National Security Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 12, 1997.
House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 12, 1997.
Committee Hearings Held.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on International Relations. H. Rept. 105-108, Part II.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on International Relations. H. Rept. 105-108, Part II.
Mr. Dickey asked unanimous consent that the Committee on International Relations have until midnight on July 25 to file a report on H.R. 695. Agreed to without objection.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred jointly and sequentially to the House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select) for a period ending not later than Sept. 5, 1997 for consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to rule XLVIII.
Referred jointly and sequentially to the House Committee on National Security for a period ending not later than Sept. 5, 1997 for consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(k), rule X.
Referred jointly and sequentially to the House Committee on Commerce for a period ending not later than Sept. 5, 1997 for consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment reported by the Committee on the Judiciary as fall within the jurisdiction of that commitee pursuant to clause 1(e), rule X.
House Committee on International Relations Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than July 25, 1997.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
House Committee on International Relations Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than July 11, 1997.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-108, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-108, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade.
Referred to House International Relations
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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 House Judiciary
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E245-246)
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 21, 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.695 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.695 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.695 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.695 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.