Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Creates a CBP National Targeting Center pilot program (within 18 months) to test big-data analytics for identifying vessels that disable or manipulate Automatic Identification System (AIS) signals as an indicator of high risk for sanctions or export‑control evasion.
The pilot may use multiple data models and specified data elements, share actionable intelligence with DHS components, other federal law enforcement, and partner foreign agencies, must coordinate with Commerce and the DNI, terminate after four years, and deliver a mandatory report to Congress.
The bill authorizes no new appropriations and states it does not authorize any new data collection beyond existing law.
Limited scope, low fiscal impact, and national security framing raise bipartisan acceptability, but many introduced technical bills nevertheless stall.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a reasonably well-scoped study/reporting instrument that clearly assigns responsibility, sets timelines, enumerates data elements to consider, and demands a detailed report on outcomes and recommendations. It includes interagency coordination and a termination date, and it constrains new information-collection authority.
Privacy and civil liberties concerns versus enforcement gains
Privacy and civil liberties concerns versus enforcement gains
Likely supportive of stronger enforcement against sanctions and export‑control evasion, but concerned about civil liberties, algorithmic bias, and foreign sharing.
Would want privacy protections, oversight, transparency, and safeguards against wrongful interdiction before endorsing operational expansion.
Generally favorable to a time‑limited pilot that uses analytics to improve enforcement, while emphasizing measurable metrics, fiscal realism, and clear interagency roles.
Will watch report outcomes before supporting scale‑up.
Likely supportive because it strengthens sanctions and export control enforcement against malign actors, but cautious about expanding federal analytic programs and resource diversion.
Wants limited scope, protection for legitimate commerce, and assurance of no mission creep.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Limited scope, low fiscal impact, and national security framing raise bipartisan acceptability, but many introduced technical bills nevertheless stall.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Privacy and civil liberties concerns versus enforcement gains
Limited scope, low fiscal impact, and national security framing raise bipartisan acceptability, but many introduced technical bills neverth…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a reasonably well-scoped study/reporting instrument that clearly assigns responsibility, sets timelines, enumerates data elements to consider, and demands a detail…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.