Sponsors
Amends the federal riot law (18 U.S.C. §2101) to restructure penalties: it updates cross-references, creates a new subsection that defines three tiers of punishments (with specified prison terms and fines) for violating the riot prohibition, and adjusts later language to match the new paragraph numbering. The change keeps the basic offense but reorganizes how punishments are set and referenced, which affects sentencing and prosecution of riot-related conduct.
In 18 U.S.C. §2101(a), replace the phrase "subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D)" and all that follows with the phrase "paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of this subsection, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b)."
Redesignate existing subsections (b) through (f) of 18 U.S.C. §2101 as subsections (c) through (g), respectively.
Insert new subsection (b) to specify punishments for a violation of subsection (a).
Under new 18 U.S.C. §2101(b)(1): A violator may be punished by a fine under this title, or a term of imprisonment of not more than ten years, or both.
Under new 18 U.S.C. §2101(b)(2): If the defendant, while carrying out an activity described in subsection (a), committed an act of violence or aided or abetted another person in committing an act of violence, the punishment is a fine under this title, a term of imprisonment of not less than one year and not more than ten years, or both.
Who is affected and how
People accused of riot-related offenses: The primary and most direct impact is on individuals charged under the federal riot statute. The amendment sets a tiered system of punishments, so defendants may face different maximum prison terms and fines depending on which tier their conduct falls into. That changes likely exposure at charging and sentencing phases.
Federal prosecutors and defense attorneys: Prosecutors will have a new statutory framework to choose charges and recommend sentencing tiers; defense counsel will need to respond to tiered exposure and may focus on facts that place conduct in a lower tier. Plea bargaining dynamics may shift as tiers create clearer leverage points.
Federal judges and courts: Sentencing decisions will use the new tiered maximums and related references; courts must apply the renumbered statutory text and resolve any interpretive questions about which tier fits particular conduct.
Law enforcement and community stakeholders: Law enforcement charging and enforcement priorities may shift given clearer sentencing gradations. Communities affected by large demonstrations or civil unrest may see changes in prosecutorial patterns. There is a risk that broader or unclear definitions of tiers could chill lawful protest activity or lead to debates about selective enforcement.
Administrative and budgetary impact: Minimal direct fiscal impact; this is a substantive change to criminal penalties rather than a spending program. Any increased incarceration costs would operate through the usual criminal justice budgeting process and would likely be incremental and dispersed.
Legal and constitutional implications: Tiering criminal penalties can trigger challenges about statutory clarity, vagueness, or overbreadth—especially where the line between protected expressive conduct and criminal riot participation may be contested. Courts may be asked to interpret the new tiers and apply them consistent with First Amendment and due process protections.
Last progress June 10, 2025 (8 months ago)
Introduced on June 10, 2025 by Thomas Bryant Cotton
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.