No Bounties on Badges Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 7114
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-04T19:15:04Z
AI-Generated Summary
Summary of H.R. 7114: No Bounties on Badges Act
Purpose
This bill aims to protect U.S. law enforcement officers by authorizing financial rewards for information that helps identify and stop individuals who offer money or other payments to harm or kill these officers. It expands existing federal reward programs to deter such threats, often called "bounties," against federal personnel.
Key Provisions
- Amendment to U.S. Code: The bill modifies Chapter 204 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which deals with rewards for information on certain crimes.
- Updates the chapter heading from "Rewards for information concerning terrorist acts and espionage" to "Rewards for information concerning terrorist acts, espionage, or offering of bounties."
- Adds a new subsection (c) to Section 3071, empowering the Attorney General to offer rewards to anyone providing information that:
- Leads to the arrest or conviction (in any country) of individuals offering bounties or payments for harming or killing U.S. law enforcement officers.
- Leads to the arrest or conviction of those conspiring or attempting such acts.
- Helps prevent or stop such acts from occurring.
- Clerical Update: Revises the table of contents in Title 18 to reflect the new chapter heading.
- Short Title: The legislation is named the "No Bounties on Badges Act."
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Previously, Chapter 204 authorized rewards only for information on terrorist acts and espionage. This bill broadens the program to include "offering of bounties" specifically targeting U.S. law enforcement officers.
- It introduces international scope, allowing rewards for actions leading to arrests or convictions anywhere in the world, which was not explicitly covered before for this type of threat.
- No changes to the amount or administration of rewards are specified; it builds on the existing framework under Section 3071.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The Department of Justice (via the Attorney General) gains a tool to encourage tips, potentially improving investigations and security for federal law enforcement agencies like the FBI or U.S. Marshals Service.
- On Citizens: Ordinary people or witnesses may be incentivized to report threats, increasing public involvement in protecting officers, but it could also lead to more tips that need verification.
- On International Relations: By enabling rewards for global arrests or preventions, it may strengthen cooperation with foreign governments on threats to U.S. personnel abroad, though it could complicate diplomacy if rewards are seen as interfering in other countries' affairs.
- Overall, it could enhance officer safety but might increase administrative costs for processing reward claims.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Law Enforcement Officers: Primary beneficiaries, as the bill directly targets threats against them, potentially reducing risks to their safety.
- Department of Justice and Attorney General: Responsible for implementing and funding the rewards program.
- Potential Informants: Individuals (citizens or foreigners) who provide tips, who could receive financial rewards.
- Perpetrators: Those offering bounties or engaging in related activities, who face heightened risk of detection and prosecution.
- Federal Agencies: Broader impact on agencies employing U.S. law enforcement, such as the Department of Homeland Security or federal courts.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Strengthens federal authority under Title 18 to combat targeted violence against officials, aligning with existing anti-terrorism laws. It may expand prosecutable offenses related to intimidation, but does not create new crimes—only rewards for information.
- Constitutional Implications: Could raise First Amendment questions if "offering bounties" is interpreted broadly to include speech or online posts encouraging harm, though the bill focuses on acts tied to violence or intimidation. It avoids directly restricting speech by targeting tangible offers of payment.
- Political Implications: Introduced by bipartisan sponsors (primarily Republicans) in response to rising threats against law enforcement, it signals congressional priority on officer protection amid concerns over violence. If passed, it could set a precedent for similar reward expansions to other public servants, influencing future anti-threat legislation.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (7)
Rep. Ezell, Mike [R-MS-4], Rep. Nehls, Troy E. [R-TX-22], Rep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16], Rep. Crawford, Eric A. "Rick" [R-AR-1], Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-5], Rep. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19], Rep. Guthrie, Brett [R-KY-2]
Recent Actions
- 2026-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2026-01-15: Introduced in House
- 2026-01-15: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- No Bounties on Badges Act — issued 2026-01-15 — PDF (2 pages)