Federal law bans school restraint, mandates parent notification and data transparency
H.R. 6617 — Keeping All Students Safe Act · Filed by Donald Beyer (D-VA) · 52 cosponsors · Introduced Dec 11, 2025 · Referred to committee
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 prohibits schools and Head Start programs from using seclusion or physical restraint on students except in narrow emergency circumstances where the student poses imminent danger of serious injury and less restrictive interventions have failed. It requires schools to report restraint incidents to parents within 24 hours, meet with parents within 5 days, and submit detailed data to the federal government disaggregated by student demographics and disability status. States receive grants to implement crisis intervention training, positive behavioral supports, and mental health services to reduce reliance on restraint.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core function is to establish federal standards prohibiting seclusion and restricting physical restraint in schools and Head Start programs, with mandatory reporting, parent notification, and federal oversight. It is a protective civil-rights measure, not a market-oriented or commemorative bill.
What the text implies
- Schools may face significant compliance costs for crisis intervention training, data systems, and behavioral support infrastructure, potentially straining budgets in under-resourced districts unless grant funding is adequate.
- The bill's disaggregation requirements (by race, disability status, economic disadvantage) will expose disparities in restraint use, potentially triggering civil rights investigations or litigation against schools with high rates among protected groups.
- Law enforcement involvement in schools is not prohibited—only regulated—meaning police may still use restraint on students in emergency circumstances, creating potential friction between school and law enforcement protocols.
- Private schools that do not receive federal funds are explicitly exempt, potentially creating a two-tier system where students in unfunded private schools lack these protections.
Who it affects
Students—particularly those with disabilities, students of color, and economically disadvantaged students who are disproportionately subjected to restraint—gain explicit legal protections, transparency, and accountability mechanisms. Parents gain immediate notification and participation rights. Schools gain federal funding to implement evidence-based alternatives.
Who stands to gain
- Crisis intervention training providers
- Behavioral health and mental health service providers
- School districts (via federal grants)
- Educational technology vendors (data collection and reporting systems)
Named in the bill
U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, State educational agencies, Local educational agencies, Head Start agencies, Department of Defense Education Activity, Department of the Interior, School security guards, Law enforcement officers, Students with disabilities, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act — and 3 more
Where it stands
52 cosponsors: 51 Democrats, 1 Republicans.
- Dec 11, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Dec 11, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Armed Services and House Committee on Education and Workforce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for…”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
4 lobbying clients named this bill on 6 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $1,000,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 17 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 72% of bills with at least one filing.
Donald Beyer, the sponsor, reported $633,099 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- National Education Association — $670,000 on 1 filing
- Epilepsy Foundation — $150,000 on 1 filing
- National Down Syndrome Society — $100,000 on 2 filings
- Arc of the United States — $80,000 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 full bill text on Jul 2, 2026; 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 bans school restraint, mandates parent notification and data transparency” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr6617 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.