[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 85 (Thursday, May 16, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H3294-H3297]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1330
                            LEOSA REFORM ACT

  Mr. MOORE of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1227, 
I

[[Page H3295]]

call up the bill (H.R. 354) to amend title 18, United States Code, to 
improve the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act and provisions relating 
to the carrying of concealed weapons by law enforcement officers, and 
for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the 
House.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1227, in lieu 
of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on the Judiciary, printed in the bill, an amendment in the 
nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 
118-34 is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                                H.R. 354

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``LEOSA Reform Act of 2024''.

     SEC. 2. CONFORMING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SAFETY ACT AND 
                   THE GUN-FREE SCHOOL ZONES ACT OF 1990.

       Section 922(q)(2)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (vi);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of clause (vii) and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(viii) by an individual authorized by section 926B or 
     926C to carry a concealed firearm.''.

     SEC. 3. MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 
                   SAFETY ACT.

       (a) Each of sections 926B(a) and 926C(a) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting ``or any other 
     provision of Federal law, or any regulation prescribed by the 
     Secretary of the Interior pertaining to a unit of the 
     National Park System'' after ``thereof''.
       (b) Each of sections 926B(b) and 926C(b) of such title are 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, except to the extent 
     that the laws apply on property used by a common or contract 
     carrier to transport people or property by land, rail, or 
     water or on property open to the public (whether or not a fee 
     is charged to enter the property)'' before the semicolon; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, except to the extent 
     that the laws apply on property used by a common or contract 
     carrier to transport people or property by land, rail, or 
     water or on property open to the public (whether or not a fee 
     is charged to enter the property)'' before the period.
       (c) Each of sections 926B(e)(2) and 926C(e)(1)(B) of such 
     title is amended by inserting ``any magazine and'' after 
     ``includes''.
       (d) Section 926C(c)(4) of such title is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(4) has met the standards for qualification in firearms 
     training during the most recent period of 12 months (or, at 
     the option of the State in which the individual resides, a 
     greater number of months, not exceeding 36 months), and for 
     purposes of this paragraph, the term `standards for 
     qualification in firearms training' means--
       ``(A) the standards for active duty law enforcement 
     officers as established by the former agency of the 
     individual;
       ``(B) the standards for active duty law enforcement 
     officers as established by the State in which the individual 
     resides;
       ``(C) the standards for active duty law enforcement 
     officers employed by any law enforcement agency in the State 
     in which the individual resides; or
       ``(D) any standard for active duty law enforcement officers 
     for firearms qualification conducted by any certified 
     firearms instructor within the State in which the individual 
     resides;''.
       (e) Section 926C(d) of such title is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``not less recently than 
     one year before the date the individual is carrying the 
     concealed firearm, been tested or otherwise found by the 
     agency to meet the active duty standards for qualification in 
     firearms training as established by the agency to carry'' and 
     inserting ``met the standards for qualification in firearms 
     training required by subsection (c)(4) for''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(B) a certification issued by the former agency of the 
     individual, the State in which the individual resides, any 
     law enforcement agency within the State in which the 
     individual resides, or any certified firearms instructor 
     within the State in which the individual resides that 
     indicates that the individual has met the standards for 
     qualification in firearms training required by subsection 
     (c)(4).''.

     SEC. 4. PERMITTING QUALIFIED CURRENT AND RETIRED LAW 
                   ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO CARRY FIREARMS IN 
                   CERTAIN FEDERAL FACILITIES.

       Section 930 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (d)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) the possession of a firearm or ammunition in a 
     Facility Security Level I or II civilian public access 
     facility by a qualified law enforcement officer (as defined 
     in section 926B(c)) or a qualified retired law enforcement 
     officer (as defined in section 926C(c)).''; and
       (2) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) The term `Facility Security Level' means a security 
     risk assessment level assigned to a Federal facility by the 
     security agency of the facility in accordance with the 
     biannually issued Interagency Security Committee Standard.
       ``(5) The term `civilian public access facility' means a 
     facility open to the general public.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, or their respective 
designees.
  The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Moore) and the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Nadler) each will control 30 minutes.
  The chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Moore).


                             General Leave

  Mr. MOORE of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 354.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MOORE of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 354, the Law Enforcement Safety, or LEOSA, Reform 
Act allows qualified active and retired law enforcement officers to 
carry a concealed firearm in national parks, school zones, public 
transportation, and some Federal facilities that are open to the 
public.
  LEOSA was initially signed into law by President George W. Bush in 
2004 to exempt certain active and retired law enforcement officers from 
local and State prohibitions on the carrying of concealed firearms. In 
order to qualify under LEOSA, active law enforcement officers must meet 
several important requirements. For example, they must be authorized to 
carry a firearm by their agency.
  They cannot be subject to disciplinary actions by the agency that can 
result in the loss of their police power.
  They must meet certain firearm qualification standards. They cannot 
be under the influence of alcohol or other intoxicating substances. 
They must not be prohibited by Federal law from receiving a firearm.
  Retired law enforcement officers must also meet several requirements 
in order to qualify under LEOSA. For example, they must have separated 
from service in good standing and served as a law enforcement officer 
for an aggregate of 10 years or more. They also are required to meet 
certain firearm training standards and must not be prohibited by 
Federal law from receiving a firearm.
  The LEOSA Reform Act will allow these officers to carry a concealed 
firearm in the same manner many citizens carry a firearm in their 
State.
  For example, the LEOSA Reform Act will allow law enforcement officers 
qualified under LEOSA to carry concealed firearms in national parks, 
Federal facilities that are open to the public, on public 
transportation, in school zones, and in other areas.
  The bill also reduces the frequency that qualified retired law 
enforcement officers are required to obtain certain qualification 
standards.
  Many States allow State-licensed, concealed carry permit holders to 
carry concealed firearms in gun-free school zones and on public 
transportation in the State in which they are licensed. This bill 
affords certain law enforcement officers the same privilege.
  The legislation improves public safety. Our officers face greater 
dangers, and current restrictions hinder their ability to carry 
firearms.
  At a time when violent crimes continue to plague our Nation, we must 
support our active and retired law enforcement officers and ensure that 
they are able to protect themselves and others, no matter where they 
are in the United States.
  This legislation is supported by the Fraternal Order of Police, the 
Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the National Association 
of Police Organizations, the Major Cities Chiefs Association, the Major 
County Sheriffs of America, National Organization of Black Law 
Enforcement Executives, and many others.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H3296]]

  Before I speak on the LEOSA Reform Act, let me express my deep 
disappointment in the behavior of the Judiciary Committee majority.
  The Judiciary Committee is now considering a resolution to hold in 
contempt the Attorney General of the United States for refusing to 
submit certain audio recordings to the committee.
  I think it is a deeply wrong request. I have expressed my opinion in 
committee. I am not going to go through it again here.
  The point is, we have a series of Judiciary Committee bills now, and 
the Judiciary Committee is meeting on that resolution now. Members of 
the Judiciary Committee who may want to speak on this series of bills 
we are going to be considering now cannot because they are trapped in 
the Judiciary Committee considering the contempt resolution. I cannot 
vote against the contempt resolution because I am stuck here.
  It is normally the practice that when you have committee business on 
the floor, you suspend the committee meeting so that people can do 
their work.
  I very much protest that the committee is still meeting while we have 
committee bills on the floor so that I must choose between dealing with 
these bills or voting on the contempt citation, and other members of 
the committee cannot be here to debate these bills.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the LEOSA Reform Act. This bill 
threatens the safety of all Americans by advancing the Republican 
agenda of more guns for more people in more public places.
  In 2004, Congress enacted the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act, or 
LEOSA, which forced States to allow off-duty and retired law 
enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons even when doing so 
conflicted with that State's concealed carry laws.
  It garnered bipartisan opposition, including from the Republican 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee at the time, Mr. Sensenbrenner, 
because it supplanted the judgment of the States about the appropriate 
use of firearms.

  It was also opposed by organizations such as the International Chiefs 
of Police, which was concerned that it could endanger law enforcement 
by causing confusion among local police who might not be able to 
distinguish between a criminal and the retired officer using a firearm.
  Other organizations opposed it because it could put police agencies 
at risk for liability for an officer who misuses a weapon in another 
State and because the requirements for retired officers were 
insufficient.
  Despite these objections, LEOSA became law, but importantly, it 
included exceptions for places like government buildings, gun-free 
school zones, and private property where States have a special interest 
in retaining control of their gun safety laws.
  These exceptions have been in place for 20 years and have served as 
important protections, but this legislation tosses those exceptions out 
the window.
  It forces States to allow off-duty and retired officers to carry 
firearms on playgrounds, in government buildings, and on buses, trains, 
subways, and boats.
  It undermines State laws limiting magazine capacity. It reduces the 
rights of private property owners who may not want concealed weapons on 
their property or in their businesses.
  It relaxes training standards so that some people will be able to 
carry a concealed firearm, even though it has been 3 years since their 
last firearms training certification.
  In addition, this legislation unravels Federal laws that have kept 
firearms out of Federal facilities. It does this for Federal facilities 
that are ``open to the public'' that are classified as ``Facility 
Security Level I or II,'' definitions that will create significant 
confusion for those trying to abide by it and for those tasked with 
enforcing it.
  For example, if a Federal facility is only partially open to the 
public or only open to the public during certain hours, does it fall 
within the bill's definition? We don't know.
  What about a facility that is open to the public so long as they are 
not carrying firearms? The bill does not say.
  As the bill itself states, the Facility Security Level is determined 
on a facility-by-facility basis and may not be publicly posted, so it 
is virtually impossible to know what Federal facilities are included in 
this definition.
  We looked for a listing of Federal facilities that are classified at 
these security levels, and we could not find one.
  Members may even have offices in Federal facilities that will 
suddenly be forced to allow concealed firearms in their doors as a 
result of this legislation.
  Not only would this bill inject confusion into Federal law, but it 
also intrudes on private property rights and undermines States' careful 
determinations on how best to protect their citizens from gun violence.
  I urge members to join me in opposing this misguided legislation, and 
I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOORE of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I actually listed four 
organizations. There are 21 law enforcement agencies and organizations 
around the country that support this legislation.
  I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rutherford), a 
friend of mine and one of the best shots I know.
  Mr. RUTHERFORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Law Enforcement Officers 
Safety Act. This LEOSA Reform Act will expand the ability of qualified 
officers, whether active, retired, or no longer in law enforcement, to 
carry concealed firearms in any State or territory, regardless of State 
or local laws.
  If we trust our law enforcement officers to carry guns while they are 
wearing a badge, why wouldn't we trust them to carry one on State and 
Federal property in their retirement?
  There is no one better trained and equipped to safely use and carry 
these firearms. In fact, we encourage our officers at the State and 
local level to carry their firearms when they are off duty because they 
are never off duty.

                              {time}  1345

  They are always required to respond if an incident occurs in their 
presence. Officers carry off-duty anyway, but what this does is expand 
that protective force multiplier concept to the entire country. I don't 
see what is wrong with that. In fact, I think it makes good sense that 
we would want good men and women who are qualified to carry firearms to 
protect those who do not.
  This bill also gives retired officers more flexibility in the timing 
of their firearms recertification, reducing unnecessary burdens while 
ensuring that they are still properly trained in firearm proficiency. 
They must remain proficient.
  Officers would be able to carry a concealed firearm if they qualify 
yearly, or whatever their State may require, up to a 3-year limit.
  The LEOSA Reform Act also extends concealed carry rights into, as you 
heard earlier, certain Federal facilities, such as post offices and 
Social Security Administration offices, whether or not they are there 
in an official capacity.
  I am not sure how that would create a lot of confusion. We carry 
firearms into all sorts of facilities now. This simply makes it open to 
these Federal facilities.
  This legislation very importantly will also exempt LEOSA-certified 
officers from State magazine capacity limits, which is very important. 
This will simplify concealed carry for officers as they travel across 
cities and States, ensuring that, in various locations, their local 
laws don't interfere with the operational readiness of these officers.
  Mr. Speaker, I have to tell you, as a former sheriff, I have seen how 
law-abiding citizens have used legally owned and carried firearms to 
protect their lives, their family's lives, and the lives of others who 
they don't even know in many situations in my own hometown of 
Jacksonville. These officers have dedicated their lives to protecting 
the public. We must leverage every bit of their training and skills to 
keep our communities safe even when they are out of uniform.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important 
bill to keep our police officers ready to protect our communities 
wherever they may find themselves. This will be a tremendous force 
multiplier for all of our

[[Page H3297]]

State and local law enforcement agencies.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation intrudes on the States' ability to make 
their own judgments about public safety, concealed firearms, and the 
regulation of their own law enforcement and would make us all less 
safe.
  We hear from the other side of the aisle all the time about States' 
rights. Then, we get legislation like this that overrules the States 
and says we know best about issues of public safety.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose the bill, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. MOORE of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, our colleagues across the aisle 
very often told us that we didn't need firearms to protect ourselves, 
that they would send the police, and then last year and the year 
before, they were calling to defund the police. The very constituents 
that they said, don't worry, you can call the police, they want to 
defund.
  Now, they want to disarm retired law enforcement officers, who could 
be Johnny-on-the-spot, in many cases, to save civilian lives.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1227, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. MOORE of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________