Bill · S. 2379· Senate(119-S-2379)
Countering Threats and Attacks on Our Judges Act
- Introduced
- 7/22/2025
- Last activity
- 11/20/2025 — Held at the desk.
- Sponsored by
- John Cornyn
- Cosponsors
- - 5 - 6
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Awaiting House
What this bill would do
The "Countering Threats and Attacks on Our Judges Act" amends the State Justice Institute Act of 1984. It allows the State Justice Institute to provide awards to eligible national nonprofit organizations. These organizations will use the funds to create and run a State judicial threat intelligence and resource center. The center focuses on improving security, monitoring threats, and providing training for state and local judges and court staff. It also requires an annual report to Congress regarding the number and types of threats against judiciary members.
Yes· 3 of 4
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?+4
Protects the safety of judges, which helps ensure the stability and integrity of the judicial process.
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+3
Requires annual reporting to Congress on the number and types of threats to judiciary members.
Does this give the federal government more power?+2
Increases federal oversight and funding of judicial threat intelligence centers.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Enhanced Safety for Judicial Officers and Staff: The bill provides for judicial officer safety education, training, and physical security assessments for courts and homes (Section 3, paragraph 15(A)).
-
Proactive Threat Monitoring: The act establishes a center to proactively monitor threats and coordinate with law enforcement to mitigate those threats (Section 3, paragraph 15(B) and (C)).
-
Improved Security Standards: It focuses on creating resources, guides, and standardized incident reporting practices for state and local courts (Section 3, paragraph 15(A)(ii) and (D)).
-
Information Sharing: The development of a national database for reporting and tracking threats allows entities working in judicial security to share critical information (Section 3, paragraph 15(E)).
-
Research on Best Practices: The bill coordinates research to identify and advance the best ways to handle judicial security (Section 3, paragraph 15(F)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts for individuals or groups are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Due Process+4Improves Government Transparency+3Increases Federal Power+2
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Rural Residents+2
- 11/20/2025
- Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8398-8399; text: CR S8398-8399)
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- Held at the desk.
- Received in the House.
- 10/14/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 10/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/30/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/24/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 7/22/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 5 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
John BarrassoRepublican · Wyoming
Christopher CoonsDemocrat · Delaware
Josh HawleyRepublican · Missouri
Mark KellyDemocrat · Arizona
Ben LujánDemocrat · New Mexico
Jerry MoranRepublican · Kansas
Mike RoundsRepublican · South Dakota
Jeanne ShaheenDemocrat · New Hampshire
Raphael WarnockDemocrat · Georgia
Sheldon WhitehouseDemocrat · Rhode Island
Todd YoungRepublican · Indiana