Summary#
The Fight Against Fentanyl Act is an introduced bill, not law. It would amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to add programs that purchase fentanyl testing kits and opioid reversal agents to an eligible use of Byrne JAG grant funds. Its stated goal is to permit that use; the bill does not require anyone to make purchases or guarantee that the items will be available.
- Byrne JAG grant funds could be used for programs to purchase the two named types of items.
- The bill does not create a new grant or organization, or require grant recipients to use funds this way.
- The bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Its passage is uncertain.
What it means for you#
- States and local grant recipients: If the bill became law, they could use Byrne JAG grant funds for programs to purchase fentanyl testing kits and opioid reversal agents. The bill does not require them to do so.
- People who might use or receive these items: The bill does not require a jurisdiction to provide the items, set rules for who may receive them, or create a direct service for the public.
- General public: The bill does not directly change criminal penalties, drug laws, or eligibility for other benefits.
Money#
No publicly available information on estimated costs.
- The bill does not provide a new appropriation or state how much grant money could be used for these purchases.
- Grant recipients could choose to direct some Byrne JAG funds to the newly listed use, but the bill does not require additional spending.
What is unclear#
- The text of the parent Act was not supplied, so the full list of uses in the amended part of the law—and how this change would fit with current grant rules—could not be verified.
- The bill does not define “fentanyl testing kits” or “opioid reversal agents.”
- It does not set rules for how purchase programs would operate, who would receive the items, or whether recipients would need to report on their use.
- It does not say how much grant funding would be available for this use or how it would interact with other eligible uses.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to let grant recipients use an existing funding stream to purchase tools related to fentanyl testing and opioid reversal.
- A possible argument for the bill is that recipients would have more flexibility to fund these purchases without the bill requiring every recipient to take the same approach.
- Naming these purchases in the law could make their eligibility under the grant clearer.
Case against#
- The bill does not require any grant recipient to buy or provide the items, so the change may not lead to their wider availability.
- It does not set purchase, distribution, or reporting rules. This leaves unclear how recipients would decide what to buy and how to assess the program.
- The bill does not provide new funding or explain how recipients should balance these purchases against other uses of grant funds.