Matt Van Epps (R-TN)
Major Non-NATO Ally Terror Threat Assessment Act
A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- In Senate committee
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The Major Non-NATO Ally Terror Threat Assessment Act requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct assessments regarding terrorism threats. These assessments focus on foreign terrorist organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists located in countries that are major non-NATO allies. The Secretary must submit these reports to specific congressional committees within 180 days of enactment and every two years thereafter. The reports must detail terrorist activities, including the use of artificial intelligence or critical technologies. Additionally, the assessment must evaluate the Department of Homeland Security's ability to monitor threats and prevent certain individuals from entering the United States.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +5
Does this tighten control of the border?
The bill requires assessments of the DHS capability to prevent terrorists from entering the United States.
- Scored +4
Does this strengthen ties with allied countries?
The bill assesses the cooperation between major non-NATO allies and the U.S. intelligence community to disrupt terrorism.
- Scored +3
Does this put more money into stopping terrorism?
The bill requires the identification of additional resources needed to counter specific terrorist threats.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Enhanced Threat Identification: The bill requires the identification of foreign terrorist organizations and Specially Designated Global Terrorists within major non-NATO ally countries (Section 2(b)(1)). This could help the government understand exactly who poses a threat.
-
Technology Monitoring: The assessment includes descriptions of terrorist activities involving artificial intelligence or critical and emerging technologies (Section 2(b)(2)). This provides insight into how modern technologies are being used by these groups.
-
Evaluating Government Capabilities: The Secretary must assess the Department of Homeland Security's capability to identify, monitor, and mitigate threats (Section 2(b)(4)). This could lead to a better understanding of whether current security measures are sufficient to protect the country.
-
Border and Entry Security: The bill requires an assessment of the ability to prevent members of these terrorist groups from entering the United States (Section 2(b)(5)). This focus aims to strengthen the ability to keep such individuals out of the country.
-
Resource Identification: The assessment includes identifying any additional resources required to counter these specific terror threats (Section 2(b)(6)). This could lead to better-informed decisions regarding what is needed to ensure public safety.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts or burdens are explicitly mentioned in the text of the bill.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this strengthen ties with allied countries? — The bill assesses the cooperation between major non-NATO allies and the U.S. intelligence community to disrupt terrorism. Does this put more money into stopping terrorism? — The bill requires the identification of additional resources needed to counter specific terrorist threats.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — The bill requires assessments of the DHS capability to prevent terrorists from entering the United States.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates that assessment results be made available to every Member of Congress upon request.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — The bill directs the study of how terrorist organizations use artificial intelligence and emerging technologies.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in cities be better off under this? — Enhanced terrorism monitoring may contribute to increased safety in populated areas.
- 7/14/2026
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 7/13/2026
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4396-4397)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4396-4397)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 8168.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4396-4398)
- Mr. Garbarino moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 7/9/2026
- Reported by the Committee on Homeland Security. H. Rept. 119-738.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 642.
- 6/24/2026
- Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence Discharged
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 28 - 2.
- 6/4/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/31/2026
- Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence.
- 3/30/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
- Introduced in House
Nellie PouDemocrat · New Jersey