Congress finally kills eight ridiculous federal crimes nobody enforces

What it does

This bill repeals or amends eight obscure federal criminal statutes that criminalize trivial or archaic conduct: writing a check under $1, possessing colored margarine in the wrong shape, discarding produce, removing postage stamps from mail, making novelty coins, wearing postal uniforms, detaining sailors' clothing, and sledding on Capitol grounds. It also adds an intent requirement to the postal-uniform statute so that merely wearing one is no longer criminal without intent to commit another federal crime.

Why we flagged it

The bill's sole function is to identify and repeal or amend eight anachronistic or trivial federal criminal statutes. It is a straightforward legislative housekeeping measure with no hidden mechanism or private beneficiary.

What the text implies

• Repealing the margarine-coloring statute removes a Depression-era dairy-protection measure; margarine manufacturers may face fewer regulatory barriers, though the practical impact is minimal given modern food labeling.
• Removing the postal-stamp removal statute eliminates a rarely enforced provision; the amendment to the postal-uniform statute (adding intent requirement) narrows criminal liability but does not eliminate it for those who wear the uniform intending to impersonate or defraud.
• The sledding-on-Capitol-grounds repeal is symbolic; it removes a provision that has likely never been prosecuted but signals legislative intent to clean up trivial statutes.

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

Who it affects

Ordinary citizens benefit by having absurd or obsolete criminal penalties removed from the books. These statutes create technical criminality for trivial conduct (a check under $1, sledding) and are rarely if ever enforced, but their existence creates legal uncertainty and potential for prosecutorial overreach. Repealing them reduces the criminal code's bloat and clarifies what conduct is actually criminal.

Named in the bill

House Committee on the Judiciary, 18 USC Section 336, Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act Section 407, 7 USC Section 491, 18 USC Section 1720, 18 USC Section 486, 46 USC Section 11110, 18 USC Section 2279, 18 USC Section 1725, 18 USC Section 1730, Capitol Police

Where it stands

1 cosponsor: 1 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”
• Jun 10, 2025 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Jun 10, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 14”

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 2 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $95,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 14 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.

• Seafarers International Union of N.a. - Agliw — $80,000 on 1 filing
• National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (nacdl) — $15,000 on 1 filing

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