PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11164-11167)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 5, 2003
Reducing Crime and Terrorism at America's Seaports Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit: (1) entry by false pretenses to a secure area of a seaport; (2) knowingly failing to obey an order to heave to by an authorized Federal officer; (3) forcibly interfering with an authorized law enforcement action or providing false information during a boarding; (4) willfully disabling a passenger vehicle; and (5) unlawfully and intentionally destroying any aid to maritime navigation maintained by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation that endangers safe navigation.
Sets penalties for knowingly and intentionally: (1) placing in U.S. waters a device or substance likely to destroy or damage a vessel or its cargo or likely to interfere with safe navigation or maritime commerce; (2) discharging or releasing into U.S. navigable water or adjoining shoreline any substance that would endanger human life, health, or welfare or the marine environment; (3) transporting aboard any vessel explosive, biological, chemical, or radioactive or nuclear material to be used to commit a Federal crime of terrorism.
Sets penalties for: (1) transporting aboard any vessel a terrorist or terror suspect; (2) willfully causing destruction of a vessel or maritime facility; (3) imparting or conveying false information concerning an attempt made to commit certain criminal acts; and (4) knowingly carrying a weapon, explosive, incendiary device, or loaded firearm on a vessel or at a seaport.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Attorney General to issue regulations to require the reporting of cargo theft.
Expands the scope of a prohibition against theft of interstate or foreign shipments.
Amends the Tariff Act of 1930 to increase penalties for noncompliance with manifest requirements.
People & committees
Sen. Biden, Joseph R., Jr. [D-DE] · D–DE
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. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11164-11167)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11163-11164)
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 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.1587 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.1587 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.1587 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.1587 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.