PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 9, 2018
Ending the Fentanyl Crisis Act of 2018
This bill amends the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act to modify the drug quantity thresholds that trigger a mandatory minimum prison term for a defendant who manufactures, distributes, imports, exports, or possesses with intent to distribute fentanyl.
Specifically, the bill reduces from 400 to 20 grams the fentanyl quantity and from 100 to 5 grams the fentanyl analogue quantity that trigger a 10-year or 20-year mandatory minimum prison term for high-level first-time or repeat offenders. It also reduces from 40 to 2 grams the fentanyl quantity and from 10 to 0.5 grams the fentanyl analogue quantity that trigger a 5-year or 10-year mandatory minimum prison term for low-level first-time or repeat offenders.
Additionally, the bill directs the U.S. Postal Service to increase the availability of chemical screening devices and dedicate the appropriate number of personnel to interdict fentanyl and other substances that are unlawfully imported into the United States.
People & committees
Sen. Kennedy, John [R-LA] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism. Hearings held.
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.2635 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.2635 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.2635 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.2635 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.