PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, And Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 5, 2013
Local Courthouse Safety Act of 2013 - 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.
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 the improvement of the safety and security of state and local courts as a factor in the national assistance program under which it provides funding to state courts and related national and nonprofit organizations. Requires state or local courts that do not have magnetometers available for use to use grant matching funds to acquire magnetometers.
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. Grayson, Alan [D-FL-9] · D–FL
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 Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, And Investigations.
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: Jan 20, 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.953 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.953 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.953 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.953 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.