PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 23, 2013
Explosive Materials Background Check Act - Amends federal criminal code provisions governing the importation, manufacture, distribution, and storage of explosive materials to: (1) include smokeless powder and black powder substitute within the definition of an "explosive" to which such provisions apply; (2) revise the definition of "manufacturer" to mean any person engaged in manufacturing (currently, in the business of manufacturing) explosive materials; and (3) delete the exemption for commercially manufactured black powder in quantities of less than fifty pounds.
Prohibits knowingly distributing explosive materials to any person who: (1) is subject to a court order (issued after a hearing meeting specified requirements) that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or a child of such intimate partner or person or from engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; (2) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence; or (3) the Attorney General has determined is an individual known or appropriately suspected to be or have been engaged in, conduct constituting or related to terrorism or providing material support or resources for terrorism and the Attorney General has a reasonable belief that such person may use explosives in connection with terrorism. Makes it unlawful for any such person to ship or transport any explosive in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or to receive or possess any explosive that has been shipped or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce.
Exempts a limited explosives material permit holder who certifies that the permit will only be used to purchase black powder, black powder substitute, and smokeless powder from provisions limiting the receipt of explosive materials to six separate occasions during a 12-month period.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Attorney General to deny or revoke an explosives materials license or permit upon determining that the licensee or holder is known to be or have been engaged in such terrorist conduct and may use explosives in connection with terrorism. Directs the Attorney General to issue guidelines describing the circumstances under which the Attorney General will exercise such authority and make such determinations.
People & committees
Sen. Lautenberg, Frank R. [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.
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.792 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.792 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.792 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.792 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.