Aaron Salter, Jr., Responsible Body Armor Possession Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3398
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-05-14: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-16T13:58:18Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The legislation, titled the "Aaron Salter, Jr., Responsible Body Armor Possession Act," aims to restrict access to high-level protective gear by prohibiting civilians from buying, owning, or possessing "enhanced body armor." This is intended to enhance public safety by limiting the availability of advanced protective equipment that could be used in violent crimes, while allowing exceptions for authorized users.
Key Provisions
- Ban on Enhanced Body Armor for Civilians: It becomes illegal for any person (except those covered by exceptions) to purchase, own, or possess enhanced body armor. This is added as a new section (Sec. 935) to Chapter 44 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which deals with firearms and related regulations.
- Definition of Enhanced Body Armor: The term refers to body armor, including helmets or shields, that provides ballistic resistance equal to or better than "RF1" level. (RF1 is a standard set by the National Institute of Justice, or NIJ, a government body that tests and rates protective gear for its ability to stop bullets.)
- Exceptions:
- Purchases, ownership, or possession by or under the authority of the U.S. government, any state or local government, or tribal governments/law enforcement.
- Covered law enforcement officers, including active "qualified law enforcement officers" (as defined in existing federal law for those with arrest powers), qualified retired officers, and corrections officers.
- Any enhanced body armor that was legally owned by a person before the law takes effect (a "grandfather clause" allowing continued possession of pre-existing items).
- Penalties: Knowing violations are punishable by a fine (under federal guidelines), imprisonment for up to 5 years, or both. This is added to Section 924(a) of Title 18.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Adds a new prohibition specifically targeting enhanced body armor to the federal firearms chapter (Chapter 44, Title 18), which previously focused on guns and ammunition but did not regulate body armor at this level.
- Introduces a precise definition of "enhanced body armor" into Section 921(a), expanding the scope of regulated items without altering existing rules on lower-level protective gear.
- Establishes criminal penalties for body armor violations, aligning them with other firearms-related offenses but creating a standalone ban outside of broader gun control measures.
Potential Impacts
- On Citizens: Everyday people (non-law enforcement civilians) will be barred from acquiring new enhanced body armor after enactment, potentially limiting personal protection options for activities like security work or hobbies. However, those who already own such items legally can keep them, avoiding retroactive punishment.
- On Government Agencies and Law Enforcement: No restrictions apply, ensuring police, federal agents, corrections officers, and tribal authorities can continue using advanced gear for protection. This could streamline procurement for these groups without federal interference.
- On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic ownership and does not address imports, exports, or foreign entities.
- Broader Effects: Manufacturers and sellers of body armor may face reduced civilian sales, shifting their market toward government contracts. Enforcement could require additional resources from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which oversees similar regulations.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Civilians: Primary group restricted, including private security personnel, hunters, or individuals seeking personal protection.
- Law Enforcement and Government Agencies: Benefit from exemptions, including federal, state, local, and tribal entities, as well as active, retired, and corrections officers.
- Body Armor Industry: Producers, distributors, and retailers, who may see changes in sales patterns and need to verify buyer eligibility.
- Public Safety Advocates and Crime Victims' Families: The bill is named after Aaron Salter, Jr., likely referencing a real-world incident involving body armor in a crime, highlighting support from those focused on preventing violence.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: The ban integrates into existing federal firearms law, potentially allowing ATF enforcement similar to gun regulations. It raises questions about interstate commerce, as body armor sales often cross state lines, but provides clear exceptions to avoid overreach.
- Constitutional Implications: Could spark debate under the Second Amendment (right to bear arms), though body armor is not a "weapon" and courts have not equated it with firearms. It might face challenges on due process grounds if enforcement lacks clear guidelines for "knowing" violations.
- Political Implications: Introduced by a bipartisan group of House members, it reflects efforts to address mass shootings or targeted violence (e.g., cases where perpetrators used body armor). It may fuel discussions on balancing public safety with individual rights, without broader gun control elements, potentially appealing across party lines but drawing opposition from Second Amendment advocates.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Kennedy, Timothy M. [D-NY-26]
Cosponsors (28)
Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Meng, Grace [D-NY-6], Rep. Latimer, George [D-NY-16], Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2], Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2], Rep. Velázquez, Nydia M. [D-NY-7], Rep. Morelle, Joseph D. [D-NY-25], Rep. Williams, Nikema [D-GA-5], Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13], Rep. Goldman, Daniel S. [D-NY-10], Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20], Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12], Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1], Rep. Suozzi, Thomas R. [D-NY-3], Rep. Friedman, Laura [D-CA-30], Rep. Olszewski, Johnny [D-MD-2], Rep. Scanlon, Mary Gay [D-PA-5], Rep. Budzinski, Nikki [D-IL-13], Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36], Rep. Thompson, Mike [D-CA-4], Rep. Amo, Gabe [D-RI-1], Rep. Moskowitz, Jared [D-FL-23], Rep. Fletcher, Lizzie [D-TX-7], Rep. Casten, Sean [D-IL-6], Rep. Pou, Nellie [D-NJ-9], Rep. Garcia, Robert [D-CA-42], Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10]
Recent Actions
- 2025-05-14: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-05-14: Introduced in House
- 2025-05-14: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Aaron Salter, Jr., Responsible Body Armor Possession Act — issued 2025-05-14 — PDF (4 pages)