Save Healthcare Workers Act

Bill Number

H.R. 3178

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Crime and Law Enforcement

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-05-05: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-06-30T08:07:18Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The "Save Healthcare Workers Act" (H.R. 3178) aims to protect hospital personnel from assault and intimidation by establishing federal criminal penalties for such acts and authorizing grants to help hospitals improve security and prevent violence. It addresses the growing problem of workplace violence in healthcare, which has worsened since the COVID-19 pandemic, by enhancing federal involvement while supporting state and local efforts.

Key Provisions

• Findings and Justification: The bill outlines congressional findings on the severity of violence against hospital workers, including statistics on injury rates, economic impacts on healthcare (a major part of U.S. GDP), and how such violence disrupts patient care and commerce. It cites Supreme Court cases to support federal jurisdiction under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which allows regulation of activities affecting interstate commerce.

• Federal Criminal Prohibition:
• Creates a new federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 120 for knowingly assaulting hospital personnel (or contractors) while they perform duties, if the assault interferes with or limits those duties.
• Base penalty: Fine and/or up to 10 years imprisonment.
• Enhanced Penalties:
• Up to 20 years if a deadly or dangerous weapon is used or bodily injury results.
• Up to 20 years if committed during a declared public emergency (e.g., public health emergency by HHS Secretary or presidential disaster declaration).
• Affirmative Defense: No prosecution if the defendant has a physical, mental, or intellectual disability and the act was a direct result of it.
• Definitions:
• "Hospital" includes various facilities like general hospitals, long-term care hospitals, rehabilitation centers, cancer/children's hospitals, critical access hospitals, and rural emergency hospitals (as defined in the Social Security Act).
• "Declaration of a public emergency" covers specific federal health or disaster declarations.

• Grants Program for Hospital Safety (Added as Part PP to the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968):
• Authorizes the Attorney General to award grants to hospitals for violence prevention programs.
• Allowable Uses: Funds can support training (e.g., de-escalation, mental health crisis response), coordination with law enforcement, installation of security technologies (e.g., surveillance, metal detectors, panic buttons, safe rooms), and other protective measures.
• Award Criteria: Prioritizes hospitals with demonstrated security/financial needs and capability to implement improvements; ensures equitable distribution across urban, suburban, rural areas and U.S. regions.
• Application Process: Hospitals apply via their chief executive, detailing fund uses and providing assurances of compliance; Attorney General issues guidelines within 90 days of enactment.
• Reporting and Oversight: Annual reports to Congress on grant usage; applies existing grant accountability rules; limits administrative costs to 2%.
• Funding: $25 million authorized annually for fiscal years 2025–2034, with funds available until spent.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• New Federal Crime: Adds Section 120 to Chapter 7 of Title 18, U.S. Code (assaults on federal officers and employees), extending federal protection to hospital workers for the first time. Previously, such assaults were handled primarily under state/local laws, with limited federal involvement.
• Grants Expansion: Inserts a new Part PP into the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, creating a dedicated funding stream for hospital violence prevention, separate from existing crime control grants. This builds on but does not alter prior programs like those for law enforcement training.
• No changes to state prosecution authority; emphasizes federal support to complement local efforts.

Potential Impacts

• Government Agencies: The Department of Justice (DOJ) gains enforcement responsibilities for the new crime, potentially increasing federal investigations and prosecutions in coordination with state/local authorities. The Attorney General's office will administer grants, requiring new guidelines, reporting, and oversight, which could strain resources but foster partnerships.
• Citizens: Enhances safety for healthcare workers, potentially reducing injuries, turnover, and disruptions in patient care. Victims may have access to federal remedies, deterring violence through harsher penalties. General public benefits from improved hospital operations and economic stability in healthcare (17.6% of GDP).
• International Relations: No direct impacts; the bill focuses on domestic healthcare and crime issues.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Hospital Personnel: Direct beneficiaries through criminal protections and training/security grants, addressing risks from assaults that predate and worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Hospitals and Healthcare Facilities: Eligible for grants to bolster security; must apply and report, but gain tools to reduce violence-related costs like absenteeism and turnover.
• Perpetrators of Violence: Face new federal penalties, especially in emergencies or with weapons/injuries, though an affirmative defense protects those with disabilities.
• Law Enforcement: Federal, state, and local agencies collaborate more closely on investigations; grants support joint training and coordination.
• Taxpayers and Funders: Bear costs via authorized appropriations, but see potential long-term savings from safer healthcare delivery.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Establishes federal jurisdiction over hospital assaults by linking them to interstate commerce (e.g., hospitals' economic role, interstate revenues, and disruptions to workers' commerce activities). Relies on precedents like Summit Health v. Pinhas (hospitals engage in interstate commerce) and Taylor v. United States (regulating violence interfering with commerce). The affirmative defense introduces a narrow exemption, potentially complicating prosecutions but ensuring fairness for disabled individuals.
• Constitutional: Invokes the Commerce Clause to justify federal intervention in traditionally local crimes, arguing aggregate effects on the national economy warrant it. This could face challenges if viewed as overreach, but findings cite court rulings supporting such regulation of economic sectors like healthcare.
• Political: Bipartisan introduction (by Reps. Dean and Miller-Meeks) highlights consensus on protecting essential workers amid rising violence concerns. It promotes federal-state partnerships without preempting local laws, potentially setting a model for addressing sector-specific crimes in other industries.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Dean, Madeleine [D-PA-4]

Cosponsors (65)

Rep. Miller-Meeks, Mariannette [R-IA-1], Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6], Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12], Rep. Castor, Kathy [D-FL-14], Rep. Davids, Sharice [D-KS-3], Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Houlahan, Chrissy [D-PA-6], Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7], Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2], Rep. Sykes, Emilia Strong [D-OH-13], Rep. Trahan, Lori [D-MA-3], Rep. Van Drew, Jefferson [R-NJ-2], Rep. Van Orden, Derrick [R-WI-3], Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1], Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-6], Rep. Ryan, Patrick [D-NY-18], Rep. Sessions, Pete [R-TX-17], Rep. Carey, Mike [R-OH-15], Rep. Rouzer, David [R-NC-7], Rep. Deluzio, Christopher R. [D-PA-17], Rep. Nunn, Zachary [R-IA-3], Rep. Schrier, Kim [D-WA-8], Rep. Kiley, Kevin [R-CA-3], Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Wilson, Joe [R-SC-2], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16], Rep. Craig, Angie [D-MN-2], Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2], Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-16], Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9], Rep. Joyce, John [R-PA-13], Rep. Kennedy, Timothy M. [D-NY-26], Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5], Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44], Rep. McBride, Sarah [D-DE-At Large], Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7], Rep. Peters, Scott H. [D-CA-50], Rep. Budzinski, Nikki [D-IL-13], Rep. Schneider, Bradley Scott [D-IL-10], Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-5], Rep. Riley, Josh [D-NY-19], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13], Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15], Rep. Goodlander, Maggie [D-NH-2], Rep. Matsui, Doris O. [D-CA-7], Rep. Mannion, John W. [D-NY-22], Rep. Gonzalez, Vicente [D-TX-34] and 15 more

Recent Actions

• 2025-05-05: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2025-05-05: Introduced in House
• 2025-05-05: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Save Healthcare Workers Act — issued 2025-05-05 — PDF (13 pages)