Federal law now shields knife carriers from state prosecution—and lets them sue states.
H.R. 60 — Knife Owners’ Protection Act of 2025 · Filed by Andy Biggs (R-AZ) · 5 cosponsors · Introduced Jan 3, 2025 · Reported out
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill creates a federal right to transport knives across state lines for individuals not otherwise prohibited by federal law. It requires knives to be locked in containers during motor vehicle and air travel (except emergency safety knives in vehicles), allows knives to be kept accessible in temporary lodging, and bars states from arresting or detaining travelers in compliance with the bill's requirements. It also creates a private right of action allowing individuals to sue states or local officials for violations, with prevailing parties entitled to attorney's fees.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a federal preemption of state knife-transport law, coupled with a private right of action against states. It is not primarily about knife ownership (which remains state-regulated) but about removing state barriers to interstate travel with knives and creating a federal enforcement remedy.
What the text implies
- The private right of action with mandatory attorney's fees creates a litigation incentive structure that may lead to suits against states for enforcement actions that comply with the bill's own requirements, if plaintiffs dispute compliance interpretation.
- The bill's definition of 'transport' is extremely broad (includes overnight lodging, stops for food/fuel, emergencies, medical treatment) and may create ambiguity about when a knife-carrier is 'in transit' vs. 'residing' in a state, potentially shielding knife possession from state law in ways not explicitly stated.
- The 'burden of proof' clause shifts the burden to the state to prove non-compliance in criminal proceedings, which is a significant procedural advantage to defendants but may complicate state prosecutions for knife-related crimes committed during interstate travel.
- Emergency safety knives are exempted from locking requirements in vehicles but not in aircraft, creating a carve-out that may incentivize carrying such knives in vehicles even when not needed for emergency purposes.
- The bill does not define 'locked container' or establish federal standards, leaving ambiguity about what constitutes compliance and potentially creating a patchwork of state interpretations that the bill purports to preempt.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill protects a narrow class of citizens (knife owners traveling interstate) from state-level restrictions, which is a genuine liberty interest. However, it simultaneously creates a federal private right of action with attorney's fees against states, which shifts enforcement power from prosecutors to private litigants and may chill legitimate state law enforcement, creating uncertainty about public safety authority.
Named in the bill
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), State governments, Political subdivisions, Federal courts
Where it stands
5 cosponsors: 5 Republicans.
- Jan 3, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jan 3, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary”
- Mar 25, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
- Mar 25, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 13 - 10”
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 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $4,039,548 in lobbying spend. A filing names 106 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.
Andy Biggs, the sponsor, reported $9,100 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- American Association for Justice — $3,610,000 on 2 filings
- National Association for Gun Rights — $429,548 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 22, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (5,093 characters) on Jul 25, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 22, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Federal law now shields knife carriers from state prosecution—and lets them sue states.” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr60 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.