New federal crime for attacks on police—with broad jurisdiction and AG gatekeeping

What it does

This bill creates a new federal crime punishing anyone who intentionally causes serious bodily injury to a law enforcement officer, with sentences up to 10 years (or life if death results, or if kidnapping or attempted killing is involved). Federal prosecution requires the Attorney General's written certification that either the state has requested federal involvement or federal prosecution is necessary for substantial justice. The law applies only when the conduct crosses state lines, involves interstate commerce, uses weapons that traveled interstate, occurs on federal property, or targets a federal law enforcement officer.

Why we flagged it

The bill's operative mechanism is straightforward: it creates a new federal crime targeting violence against law enforcement officers and establishes federal jurisdiction under specified circumstances. This is a criminal-law amendment, not a regulatory carve-out or appropriation.

What the text implies

• The definition of 'law enforcement officer' is broad enough to include state and local investigators, detention officers, and other public-agency employees—potentially federalizing conduct that traditionally falls under state jurisdiction.
• The interstate-commerce nexus (subsection (b)(1)(B)) may capture conduct with minimal connection to interstate commerce, expanding federal jurisdiction beyond traditional limits.
• The AG certification requirement (subsection (c)) creates a gatekeeping mechanism that could be applied inconsistently across administrations, potentially politicizing federal prosecution decisions.
• The bill does not define 'serious bodily injury,' leaving that term to existing federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1365 or common law), which may create ambiguity in charging decisions.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

The bill strengthens criminal penalties for violence against law enforcement, which protects public safety and officers' ability to perform their duties—a public benefit. However, the broad definition of 'law enforcement officer' (including all public-agency employees authorized to investigate or detain) combined with federal jurisdiction over interstate-commerce-connected conduct may expand federal criminal reach into conduct that could be prosecuted under state law, potentially creating duplic

Named in the bill

Attorney General, Federal law enforcement officers, State law enforcement agencies, Chapter 7, Title 18, United States Code

Where it stands

120 cosponsors: 95 Republicans, 24 Democrats, 1 Independents.

• Feb 25, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Feb 25, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

2 lobbying clients named this bill on 4 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $121,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 23 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.

John Rutherford, the sponsor, reported $533,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Peace Officers Research Association of California — $100,000 on 2 filings
• North Carolina Fraternal Order of Police — $21,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.