Ted Lieu (D-CA)
Prevent the Misuse of Federal Law Enforcement Act
A Democratic bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "Prevent the Misuse of Federal Law Enforcement Act," aims to limit how certain federal law enforcement agencies operate within local jurisdictions. It seeks to restrict the law enforcement duties of personnel under the Controlled Substances Act to matters strictly related to drug investigations. The bill also restricts the U.S. Marshals Service from deputizing local or federal law enforcement officers without a request from the appropriate chief executive. Furthermore, it limits the Secretary of Homeland Security's ability to designate additional employees for protecting federal property during protests without local executive approval.
Yes
- Scored +6
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill increases state and local sovereignty by requiring local chief executives to approve federal law enforcement deputization and property protection deployments during protests.
- Scored +5
Does this change how police departments operate?
The bill implements local oversight by requiring chief executives to request the deputization of officers by the U.S. Marshals Service.
- Scored +3
Would people in cities be better off under this?
The bill provides local control over federal security presence during protests, which often occur in urban areas.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Drug Enforcement Focus: Under Section 2(a), law enforcement duties regarding controlled substances would be restricted to those that relate to, arise from, or supplement drug investigations. This ensures that these specific powers are used for their intended purpose regarding drugs.
-
Local Sovereignty and Oversight: Section 2(b) requires the U.S. Marshals Service to receive a request from the chief executive of a State, Indian tribe, territory, or the District of Columbia before deputizing law enforcement officers. This gives local leaders more control over federal deputization.
-
Protection of Local Authority During Protests: Section 2(c)(2) prevents the Secretary of Homeland Security from designating additional employees for duty in areas where protest activity is occurring unless there is a request from the local chief executive. This provides local jurisdictions more say in how federal personnel are deployed during protests.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No Negative Impacts Identified: The provided text does not explicitly list any negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people.
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.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill increases state and local sovereignty by requiring local chief executives to approve federal law enforcement deputization and property protection deployments during protests.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill implements local oversight by requiring chief executives to request the deputization of officers by the U.S. Marshals Service.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in cities be better off under this? — The bill provides local control over federal security presence during protests, which often occur in urban areas.
- 4/22/2026
- Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Maxine DexterDemocrat · Oregon