PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 15, 2026
Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act
This act directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to jointly develop a standard methodology for identifying the country of origin of seafood to support enforcement against illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUU fishing) and seafood fraud.
NOAA and NIST must consult with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard in developing the methodology, which must use chemical analysis to identify the country of origin of seafood. The methodology must be consistent with the needs of federal and state law enforcement agencies in combating IUU fishing and seafood fraud. The methodology must also include a portable field kit and, to the extent practicable, be appropriate for testing prepared food (including raw preparations of seafood such as sushi). The agencies must conduct pilot studies of the methodology on red snapper and tuna.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Within two years after the act's enactment, NIST must report to Congress regarding the methodology and a plan for operationalizing it. The report must explain any aspects of its methodology that are impracticable, whether additional research would make the methodology practicable, and whether an alternate approach might be practicable.
People & committees
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 119-123.
Became Public Law No: 119-123.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate agreed to the House amendment to S. 283 by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5020)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate agreed to the House amendment to S. 283 by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5020)
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5557-5558)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5557-5558)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 283.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5557-5558)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4341; text: CR S4341-4342)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 86.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Cruz without amendment. With written report No. 119-24.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Cruz without amendment. With written report No. 119-24.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
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: Oct 26, 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.283 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.283 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.283 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.283 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.