PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10415-10416)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 12, 2000
Drug Court Act of 2000 - Authorizes ten Federal district courts, as selected by the Office of Justice Programs of the Department of Justice (DOJ), to establish drug courts in high crime districts that will: (1) expedite the criminal justice process for eligible offenders until they are declared ineligible or selected for inclusion in a drug court program; and (2) maintain jurisdiction over the offenders' cases before, during, and after participation in the program. Directs that each Federal drug court enter into an agreement that will allow all eligible offenders, in exchange for payment for the cost, to participate in a State's drug court program for substance abuse treatment and rehabilitation. Subjects each such agreement to Office approval. Provides that, except as specified, rules governing drug courts will be promulgated separately by each participating Federal district court, with the advice of the Office, subject to DOJ approval.Excludes as an "eligible offender" a person who: (1) is accused of violent criminal offenses; (2) is not accused of drug, drug-related, or drug-motivated offenses; (3) has previously been convicted of a Federal or State violent felony offense; or (4) for any other reason within the court's discretion does not meet all requirements of the applicable drug court.Sets forth provisions regarding offender eligibility requirements, the handling of ineligible offenders, requirements for drug program participants, identification of drug program participants, participant fitness examination, eligibility hearings, judicial discretion regarding eligibility, drug court responsibilities, disciplinary sanctions, drug court records, and administrative fees.Requires that each program provide all participating offenders with a personalized program, including required elements of treatment, supervision, rehabilitation, education, and job skills training.
People & committees
Sen. Torricelli, Robert G. [D-NJ] · D–NJ
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 S10415-10416)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10415)
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: 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.3191 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.3191 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.3191 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.3191 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.