PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 7, 1994
Protection from Sexual Predators Act of 1994 - Expresses the sense of the Congress that States should: (1) more seriously consider the relatively high recidivism rate of sexual offenders when deciding whether to plea bargain with first-time sexual offenders and whether to grant parole to sexual offenders; and (2) review their treatment and parole supervision programs for sexual offenders to assure that such programs are fulfilling their goals. Amends the Federal criminal code to provide that whoever violates provisions regarding aggravated sexual abuse (or engages in conduct in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce that would be a violation of such provisions if the offense had occurred in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States) after previously having been convicted of another State or Federal sexual abuse offense (or conduct which would have been such an offense if the offense had occurred in such jurisdiction) shall be imprisoned for life. Directs the Attorney General to establish guidelines for State programs requiring: (1) any person who is convicted of a sex offense to register and keep up to date a current address with a designated State law enforcement agency (LEA) for ten years after being released from prison or placed on parole, supervised release, or probation; and (2) each State to provide information obtained about the registered person to the Attorney General on a prompt and regular basis and in a uniform format. Requires the Attorney General to: (1) maintain on-line availability of information obtained under this Act for use by authorized LEAs in carrying out their functions; and (2) provide for the privacy of such information. Directs each State to implement the registration provisions within three years. Makes States not in compliance after such time subject to a reduction of funds under title I (drug control and system improvement grants) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. Requires the National Institute of Justice to carry out a study of persistent sexual predators and to report to the Congress and the President.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
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 Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6533)
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.2162 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.2162 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.2162 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.2162 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.