PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 23, 2013
Military Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2013 - Revises provisions concerning protected communications from members of the Armed Forces (members) to specified military and government officials (military whistleblower provisions) to include communications made to a court, grand jury, or court-martial proceeding or to an authorized official of the Department of Justice (DOJ) or another law enforcement agency.
Includes as additional protected communications any alleged violation of law, rule, or regulation, including those prohibiting rape, sexual assault, or other sexual misconduct under provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
Provides that neither an initial determination of whether a prohibited personnel retaliatory action was taken against a member for such a communication nor a subsequent investigation is required in the case of an allegation made more than one year (under current law, 60 days) after the member first becomes aware of the personnel action.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires reports by inspectors general of the military departments concerned on prohibited retaliatory personnel actions to: (1) be submitted to such department's Secretary (under current law, to the Secretary of Defense [DOD]); and (2) include an explicit determination as to whether a prohibited personnel action has occurred and recommendations for disposition of the complaint, including appropriate corrective action for the member. Requires any such corrective action to occur within 30 days after the receipt of such report. Requires the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) (with respect to the Coast Guard) and the Secretary concerned, upon determining that an order for corrective or disciplinary action is not appropriate, to notify the Secretary of Defense, the congressional defense committees, and the member of such determination and the reasons for not taking action. Requires (under current law, allows) the appropriate correction of military records upon the request of a member for whom a prohibited action determination has been made.
Establishes the member's and agency's burden of proof with respect to military whistleblower protection investigations and determinations.
People & committees
Sen. Warner, Mark R. [D-VA] · D–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in Senate
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 12, 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 S.1081 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 S.1081 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 S.1081 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 S.1081 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.