Summary#
This bill would let state peace officer standards and training agencies (often called "POST" agencies) access criminal history records that are otherwise restricted. It changes a federal law that lists who may receive criminal history information and adds POST agencies to that list. The bill also directs the Attorney General to update federal rules within 180 days to implement the change.
- Main change: Adds “peace officer standards and training agencies” to the types of entities allowed to receive criminal history records under federal law.
- Defines key terms: Gives a definition of a peace officer standards and training agency and of “State.”
- Regulatory step: Requires the Attorney General to amend part 20 of title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations within 180 days to carry out the law.
What it means for you#
- Peace officer standards and training agencies (POST): They would be able to obtain criminal history records for use in certification, licensing, hiring standards, training, ethical conduct reviews, and retention decisions, if state law gives them those powers.
- Law enforcement job applicants or officers: Their criminal history could be obtained by the POST agency when that agency is acting under its statutory authority. This could affect hiring, certification, or decertification processes.
- State governments and agencies: States that operate POST agencies may need to set up procedures to request, receive, store, and use criminal history records. How they use the records will depend on state law and any new federal rules.
- Public: The bill could affect public trust and officer accountability if POST agencies use criminal history information for screening or decertification. The bill itself does not describe specific uses beyond the agency’s statutory roles.
- Attorney General / federal agencies: The Attorney General must change federal regulations (part 20 of title 28) within 180 days to implement access; those rule changes will determine practical details like safeguards and limits on use.
Expenses#
No publicly available information.
- The bill text and supplied material do not include a fiscal note or cost estimate.
- This change could require administrative work by POST agencies and by the agencies that provide criminal history records (for example, staff, systems, or training), but the bill does not estimate those costs.
- It could also require the Department of Justice to spend time and resources updating and implementing regulatory changes, but no dollar amounts are provided.
Proponents' View#
- The bill appears intended to let POST agencies see criminal history records so they can better enforce standards for hiring, training, ethics, and retention.
- Allowing POST agencies access could make background checks and decertification reviews more direct and consistent with their statutory duties.
- Requiring a regulatory update within 180 days could be seen as a way to put federal rules in place quickly to govern how access will work.
Opponents' View#
- One concern is privacy and data handling: the bill does not itself set rules on how POST agencies must protect or limit use of the criminal history information; those details are left to the Attorney General’s regulatory changes.
- It is unclear what limits will apply on re‑disclosure or on exactly which records POST agencies may obtain, so misuse or inconsistent use across states could be a risk.
- Another concern is administrative burden: POST agencies and record‑holding agencies may need new staff, systems, or procedures to handle requests and storage of criminal history records, but no cost estimate is provided.
- The 180‑day deadline for changing federal regulations may raise questions about whether there is enough time to design appropriate privacy and security safeguards.
What is unclear: The bill does not say exactly how POST agencies may use received criminal history records, what safeguards must be in place, or how state laws interact with the new federal authorization.