PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2025
Stop Arming Cartels Act of 2025
This bill expands the regulation of .50 caliber rifles under federal firearms laws and authorizes new civil remedies for certain violations.
Firearms that are trafficked from the United States to Mexico are often routed to transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), including cartels. In recent years, TCOs increasingly use .50 caliber rifles in attacks on Mexican security forces.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
In 2025, in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) bars a civil lawsuit by Mexico against U.S. firearms manufacturers and one U.S. firearms distributor for costs associated with gun violence in Mexico. (The PLCAA limits the civil liability of firearms manufacturers and sellers for damages resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearms.)
This bill generally criminalizes the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, and possession of .50 caliber rifles under the Gun Control Act and subjects .50 caliber rifles to regulation (i.e., registration and licensing requirements) under the National Firearms Act.
Additionally, the bill criminalizes the sale or transfer of firearms and ammunition to foreign individuals or entities designated as significant foreign narcotics traffickers or as part of their networks and sanctioned under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (Kingpin Act).
Finally, the bill creates an exception under the PLCAA to allow civil lawsuits against firearms manufacturers or sellers that knowingly sell or transfer a firearm or ammunition to a foreign individual or entity designated and sanctioned under the Kingpin Act.
People & committees
Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, 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 Ways and Means, 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: Jul 24, 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.923 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.923 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.923 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.923 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.