Federal law shields hospital workers from assault with up to 20-year penalties.

What it does

This bill creates a new federal crime for assaulting hospital workers on hospital grounds, with penalties up to 10 years imprisonment, enhanced to 20 years if a weapon is used or serious injury results. It covers employees of hospitals, long-term care facilities, rehabilitation centers, and contractors working at these facilities. The bill includes an affirmative defense for defendants with disabilities whose conduct was a direct manifestation of that disability and who could not appreciate the wrongfulness of their actions.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is a straightforward federal criminal statute protecting a specific class of workers from assault. It is a public-safety measure addressing documented workplace violence in healthcare, not a regulatory carve-out, subsidy, or commemorative provision.

What the text implies

• Federal prosecution of assault on hospital grounds may displace or supplement state/local prosecutions, creating potential jurisdictional overlap and prosecutorial discretion questions.
• The affirmative disability defense shifts burden to defendant but requires proof by preponderance; outcomes may vary significantly by jurisdiction and judicial interpretation of 'clear and direct manifestation.'
• GAO study requirement (Section 3) creates accountability mechanism but results are non-binding; Congress may or may not act on findings regarding effectiveness or unintended consequences.
• Definition of 'hospital grounds' is broad (buildings, roads, paths, open spaces) and may capture parking lots, adjacent properties, or contractor work sites in ways that expand federal jurisdiction beyond core hospital facilities.

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

Who it affects

Hospital workers gain a dedicated federal protection mechanism and enhanced legal recourse against workplace violence, a documented public-health problem in healthcare settings. The affirmative disability defense preserves due process for defendants with qualifying disabilities, balancing worker safety with fairness to vulnerable defendants.

Named in the bill

Hospital workers and contractors, Federal Bureau of Investigation (implied enforcement), U.S. Department of Justice, Government Accountability Office (GAO), Hospitals (Medicare-defined), Long-term care facilities, Rehabilitation facilities, Critical access hospitals, Rural emergency hospitals

Where it stands

3 cosponsors: 1 Democrats, 1 Independents, 1 Republicans.

• May 5, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• May 5, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on the Judiciary · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the 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

17 lobbying clients named this bill on 29 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $9,419,627 in lobbying spend. A filing names 11 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 96% of bills with at least one filing.

Cindy Hyde-Smith, the sponsor, reported $1,334,320 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• American Hospital Association — $4,470,000 on 1 filing
• Greater New York Hospital Association — $1,130,000 on 2 filings
• America's Essential Hospitals — $1,080,000 on 2 filings
• Trinity Health — $720,000 on 3 filings
• American College of Emergency Physicians — $468,727 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.