GPS Act
Latest action. Referred to the subcommitteeA smaller panel inside a standing committee with jurisdiction over a slice of its subject matter. Most hearings and the first markup usually happen here.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, And Investigations.
Geolocational Privacy and Surveillance Act or the GPS Act - Amends the federal criminal code to prohibit intentionally: (1) intercepting geolocation information pertaining to another person; (2) disclosing to any other person such information pertaining to another, knowing that the information was obtained in violation of this Act; (3) using geolocation information, knowing that the information was obtained in violation of this Act; or (4) disclosing to any other person the geolocation information pertaining to another person intercepted by means authorized under this Act, knowing that the information was obtained in connection with a criminal investigation, having obtained or received information in connection with a criminal investigation, with intent to improperly obstruct, impede, or interfere with a duly authorized criminal investigation. Sets penalties for violations.
Makes specified exceptions for interceptions involving: (1) information acquired by a provider of covered services (electronic communication service, remote computing service, or geolocation information service) in the normal course of business; (2) federal officers, employees, or agents conducting foreign intelligence surveillance; (3) persons having given prior consent; (4) public information; (5) emergency information; (6) theft; and (7) a warrant.
Prohibits: (1) a person providing covered services from intentionally divulging geolocation information pertaining to another person, with exceptions; and (2) the use of such information, and evidence derived from it, as evidence. Authorizes: (1) the use of geolocation information by investigative or law enforcement officers, or by a state's principal prosecuting attorney, to intercept such information under specified emergency circumstances; and (2) the recovery of civil damages by any person whose geolocation information is intercepted, disclosed, or intentionally used in violation of this Act.
Modifies the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to require a search warrant to acquire geolocation information.
Amends the federal criminal code to include any geolocation information service within the definition of a "covered entity" for purposes of provisions prohibiting obtaining confidential phone records information from such an entity by fraud or related activity.
The summary continues for 2 more paragraphs. Read it in full on Congress.gov
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Introduced in House" stage on March 21, 2013. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on April 15, 2013: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, And Investigations.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 113th Congress (2013-14), 296 of the 9,091 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 3.3 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) introduced it on March 21, 2013, and 20 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 13 Democrats, 7 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on March 21, 2013, 4921 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 4896 days ago, on April 15, 2013.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 113th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2015 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers