Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
Seneca Nation Law Enforcement Efficiency Act
A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
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 is called the Seneca Nation Law Enforcement Efficiency Act. It was introduced in the Senate on September 23, 2026. The main goal of the bill is to cancel out the applicability of an older law from July 2, 1948. This cancellation applies specifically to the territory of the Seneca Nation of Indians in New York. The bill sets rules for how this change can happen. It requires written agreement from both the Attorney General and the Seneca Nation of Indians. It also requires the Attorney General to consult with the Seneca Nation and the State of New York beforehand.
Yes
- Scored +6
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
The bill directly benefits the Seneca Nation of Indians by providing tribal self-determination and authority regarding jurisdictional matters on their territory.
- Scored +5
Does this change how police departments operate?
The bill allows for the nullification of a 1948 law regarding New York State jurisdiction on Seneca Nation territory, enhancing tribal self-determination over law enforcement.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The legislation requires formal consultation and written concurrence between the Attorney General, the State of New York, and the Seneca Nation.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill allows for the nullification of state jurisdictional authority previously granted over the Seneca Nation territory upon specific federal and tribal concurrence.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Self-Determination and Agreement: Under Section 2(b), the jurisdiction granted to New York by the 1948 law will not apply to the territory of the Seneca Nation, provided there is written concurrence from both the Attorney General and the Seneca Nation of Indians. This gives the Seneca Nation a direct say in this matter through the requirement of their written agreement.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Burden of Coordination and Consultation: Under Section 2(b), the Attorney General must consult in advance with both the Seneca Nation of Indians and the State of New York prior to making a concurrence, and the process requires the written concurrence of both the Attorney General and the Seneca Nation. This creates specific procedural steps and administrative burdens that must be successfully met before the law's nullification can take effect.
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 Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill directly benefits the Seneca Nation of Indians by providing tribal self-determination and authority regarding jurisdictional matters on their territory.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill allows for the nullification of a 1948 law regarding New York State jurisdiction on Seneca Nation territory, enhancing tribal self-determination over law enforcement.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The legislation requires formal consultation and written concurrence between the Attorney General, the State of New York, and the Seneca Nation. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill allows for the nullification of state jurisdictional authority previously granted over the Seneca Nation territory upon specific federal and tribal concurrence.
- 9/23/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Introduced in Senate