Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
Restoring the Armed Career Criminal Act
A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
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 "Restoring the Armed Career Criminal Act," aims to amend title 18 of the United States Code regarding the sentencing of armed career criminals. It modifies section 924 to change which previous offenses trigger certain sentencing requirements. The legislation establishes specific definitions for what constitutes a "serious felony conviction." Under these changes, individuals who violate section 922(g) and have three or more previous serious felony convictions face mandatory prison time. The law dictates a sentence of no less than 15 years and no more than 30 years. Additionally, it prohibits courts from suspending sentences or granting probation for these specific convictions.
Yes
- Scored +5
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill expands federal jurisdiction over sentencing by amending the federal criminal code.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -5
Does this shorten or soften prison sentences?
The bill implements stricter mandatory minimum sentences and restricts judicial discretion for certain offenders.
- Scored -4
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill limits due process by establishing mandatory minimum sentences and prohibiting judicial discretion for suspension of sentences.
- Scored -3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Criminal justice legislation with strict mandatory minimums often disproportionately impacts low-income communities.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Mandatory Minimum Sentences: Under Section 2, subsection (e)(1), individuals who knowingly violate section 922(g) and have three or more previous serious felony convictions will face a prison term of not less than 15 years and not more than 30 years.
-
Elimination of Probation for Certain Convictions: Section 2, subsection (e)(1) states that the court shall not suspend the sentence of, or grant a probationary sentence to, a person with respect to a conviction under section 922(g) if they meet the criteria.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Strict Sentencing Requirements: Section 2, subsection (e)(1) mandates that a person shall be fined and imprisoned for a period of not less than 15 years and not more than 30 years for certain violations.
-
Expanded Definition of Serious Felony Convictions: Section 2, subsection (e)(2) defines a "serious felony conviction" to include any felony offense punishable by a statutory maximum of at least 10 years, or groups of convictions where a court imposed a total term of at least 10 years.
-
Restrictions on Judicial Discretion: Section 2, subsection (e)(1) dictates that the court shall not suspend the sentence of, or grant a probationary sentence to, certain individuals.
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.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Strict sentencing laws can disproportionately impact minority populations within the criminal justice system. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Strict sentencing laws can disproportionately impact minority populations within the criminal justice system. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Criminal justice legislation with strict mandatory minimums often disproportionately impacts low-income communities.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this shorten or soften prison sentences? — The bill implements stricter mandatory minimum sentences and restricts judicial discretion for certain offenders. Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill restricts judicial discretion through mandatory minimum sentences rather than reforming policing practices.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal jurisdiction over sentencing by amending the federal criminal code. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill limits due process by establishing mandatory minimum sentences and prohibiting judicial discretion for suspension of sentences.
- 7/10/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Tom CottonRepublican · Arkansas