Who is affected and how:

• Elements of the intelligence community: Benefit from an additional statutory tool to deter and criminally penalize unauthorized entry to facilities they control. This can strengthen physical security protections and provide a clear penalty regime for repeat intrusions.

• Individuals (general): Members of the public who attempt to enter or access intelligence-community-controlled property that is clearly marked as closed or restricted may face criminal charges and escalating jail terms on repeat offenses. This includes protesters, trespassers, and any person lacking authorization.

• Contractors and employees working at or near such facilities: Contractors who lack proper authorization but attempt access could be subject to the statute; however, those with authorized access are unaffected. The law may prompt contractors to enforce access controls more strictly.

• Federal law enforcement and prosecutors: May see increased responsibility to investigate and prosecute violations of the new offense. Resource needs will depend on enforcement frequency; routine prosecutions would use existing capacities.

• Journalists and researchers: Could be exposed to criminal risk if they attempt to access marked restricted sites without authorization, potentially raising free-press and public-interest reporting concerns in some contexts.

• Civil liberties stakeholders: May raise concerns about breadth of application, clarity of "clearly marked" standard, potential chilling effects on lawful protest or reporting near sensitive sites, and the severity of penalties for repeat offenses.

Net effect: The legislation narrows in scope (targeting property under intelligence community control and clearly marked), but it raises potential legal and policy questions about enforcement discretion, definitions, and proportionality of penalties for repeated unauthorized conduct. Fiscal impacts are likely modest and tied to criminal case processing and incarceration when imposed.