PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 4, 2009
Border Law Enforcement Anti-Drug Trafficking Act of 2009 - Authorizes the Attorney General to award grants on a competitive basis to eligible law enforcement agencies and institutions of higher education to assist such agencies in addressing drug-related criminal activity within their jurisdictions. Requires such grants to be used to: (1) combat criminal activities along the southern border of the United States; (2) facilitate information sharing and collaboration by law enforcement agencies; (3) enhance jails, community corrections, and detention operations; and (4) provide training and technical assistance related to negotiation and rescue tactics, intelligence and information sharing on drug trafficking organizations, and interdiction.
Defines "eligible law enforcement agency" as a tribal, state, or local law enforcement agency, including a community corrections agency and any agency that employs prosecutors, probation officers, or parole officers, that is located or performs duties in: (1) Arizona, California, New Mexico, or Texas; or (2) a jurisdiction that has been designated as a high intensity drug trafficking area.
People & committees
Sen. Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM] · D–NM
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 the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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 S.1190 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.1190 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.1190 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.1190 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.