PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1621-1623)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 16, 2010
Fugitive Information Networked Database Act of 2010 or the FIND Act - Directs the Attorney General to make one-year grants to states or Indian tribes to develop and implement or upgrade secure electronic warrant management systems for the preparation, submission, and validation of felony warrants that are compatible and interoperable with the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. Provides for set asides of grant funds to hire additional personnel to validate warrants entered into the NCIC database and for Indian tribes.
Requires states that submit a grant renewal application to file with the Attorney General and appropriate county clerk's offices an annual report specifying: (1) the number of defendants, including indigent defendants, assessed or interviewed for pretrial release; (2) the number of failures to appear for a scheduled court appearance; and (3) the number and type of infractions committed by defendants while on pretrial release.
Directs the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to provide state, local, and tribal government agencies the technology to make state and local warrant databases compatible and interoperative with the NCIC database.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Comptroller General to report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on felony warrants issued by state, local, and tribal governments and entered into the NCIC database and on the apprehension and extradition of persons with active felony warrants.
Directs the Attorney General to make grants to states and Indian tribes to extradite fugitives for prosecution. Requires states and Indian tribes applying for grants to report to the Attorney General on the number of active felony warrants they have issued.
People & committees
Sen. Specter, Arlen [D-PA] · D–PA
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 the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1621-1623)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1620-1621)
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.3120 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.3120 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.3120 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.3120 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.