PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 12, 2019
This bill requires the U.S. Center for Safe Sport to provide grant funding accountability and protect victims of abuse from retaliation.
Amounts transferred to the center by the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) or a national governing body shall be used primarily for the investigation and resolution of allegations of sexual misconduct, or other misconduct, made by amateur athletes affiliated with the USOC, a national governing body, or a paralympic sports organization.
The center shall be audited at least annually and shall report to Congress annually.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) may petition in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for removal of officers and directors of the center if the center (1) engages in any act, practice, or policy that is materially inconsistent with its purpose; or (2) refuses, fails, or neglects to discharge the obligations of the center to protect the safety of amateur athletes.
DOJ may not award a grant to an entity that supports oversight of the USOC if it holds amounts in an offshore account for the purpose of avoiding payment of tax on unrelated business income of charitable organizations.
The USOC, a national governing body, a paralympic sports organization, or any officer, employee, contractor, or agent may not retaliate against any protected individual, including amateur athletes, coaches, or trainers, because of a protected disclosure regarding abuse. National governing bodies must provide protection from retaliation to protected individuals.
People & committees
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA] · R–IA
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 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: Sep 8, 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.2838 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.2838 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.2838 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.2838 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.