Mychal Judge Police and Fire Chaplains Public Safety Officers' Benefit Act of 2002
Became Public Law No: 107-196.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 1, 2002
Mychal Judge Police and Fire Chaplains Public Safety Officers' Benefit Act of 2002 - Amends the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to include police and fire department chaplains killed in the line of duty among persons who qualify to receive public safety officer death benefits.Provides that if there is no surviving spouse or surviving child any such benefits shall be paid to the person designated by such officer as beneficiary under that officer's most recently executed life insurance policy, provided that such individual survived such officer. (Current law restricts such beneficiaries to the spouse, child, or parent.)
A similar measure H.R. 3297 was laid on the table without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection. (text: CR H3399-3400)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text: CR H3399-3400)
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H3399-3400)
Mr. Sensenbrenner asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3975-3976; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S3975; text as passed Senate: CR S3976)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3975-3976; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S3975; text as passed Senate: CR S3976)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 364.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy with an amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3627)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.2431 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.2431 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.2431 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.2431 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.