PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Dec 17, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Strengthening Investigations of Sex Offenders and Missing Children Act of 2011 - Amends the federal judicial code to authorize the United States Marshals Service to investigate, at the request of another federal, state, or local law enforcement agency, cases involving: (1) a sex offender who violates a sex offender registration requirement, or (2) a missing child.
People & committees
Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8086-8087; text as passed: CR S8087)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8086-8087; text as passed: CR S8087)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 246.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
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.1792 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.1792 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.1792 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.1792 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.