Latest action: Received in the Senate.
Bill is filed in its originating chamber and assigned a number.
Sponsor
Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI)
Filed in the House.
Next: In Committee
Members of the committee(s) the bill was referred to
Requires law enforcement to use de-escalation techniques before using force.
The problem
Police encounters sometimes involve unnecessary force. Better training in de-escalation techniques could reduce injuries and deaths during law enforcement interactions.
The proposal
The bill establishes requirements for police to use de-escalation methods like verbal communication and tactical repositioning before using physical force or weapons.
The impact
Police officers must follow new procedures during calls. Communities may experience fewer forceful encounters. Officers need additional training and resources to comply.
De-escalation techniques can reduce harm to both civilians and officers. When police talk and calm situations first, fewer people get hurt.
Officers learn communication skills and how to handle tense situations safely. This can make policing more professional and effective overall.
When people see police trying to avoid force, they may trust law enforcement more. This can lead to better cooperation with police.
Reduced use of force means fewer injury claims and lawsuits against police departments. This can save taxpayer money long-term.
Police departments need funding for new training programs and personnel. Small police departments may struggle to afford these requirements.
Some argue de-escalation requirements could delay necessary defensive actions. Officers might face increased risk if they must try talking first.
Police departments must change procedures and hold officers accountable. Enforcement and consistency across all departments could be difficult.
De-escalation focus might slow police response to active threats. Some dangerous situations may require faster, more direct police action.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 4307
Enhancing Detection of Human Trafficking Act
HR 10638
Skills Against Violence Act of 2026
HR 10565
Sexual Abuse Services in Detention Act
HR 10543
PREP Act
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.