Intelligence Identities Protection Act
Latest action. Reported to House from the Committee on the Judiciary, H. Rept. 96-1219 (Part II).
(Reported to House from the Select Committee on Intelligence with amendment, H. Rept. 96-1219 (Part I)) Intelligence Identities Protection Act - Amends the National Security Act of 1947 by adding a new title V: Protection of Certain National Security Information. Establishes a maximum criminal penalty of ten years' imprisonment and/or a $50,000 fine for anyone who, having had authorized access to classified information, intentionally discloses to any individual not authorized to receive classified information any information that identifies a covert agent, knowing that the information so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual's intelligence relationship to the United States. Establishes a maximum criminal penalty of five years' imprisonment and/or a $25,000 fine for anyone who, having had authorized access to classified information, learns the identity of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information so identifies such agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such agent's relationship to the United States. Establishes a maximum criminal penalty of three years' imprisonment and/or a $15,000 fine for anyone who with intent to impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States discloses such information with such knowledge. Makes it a defense to such crimes that before the commission of the offense the United States had publicly acknowledged or revealed the intelligence relationship of the individual to the United States. Provides that no person other than the person committing such offense shall be subject to prosecution, except with respect to those acting in the course of an effort to identify and expose covert agents with intent to impair U.S. intelligence activities. Stipulates that: (1) proof of intentional disclosure shall not alone constitute proof of intent to impair U.S. intelligence activities; and (2) it shall not be an offense to transmit such information directly to the congressional intelligence committees. Directs the President to establish procedures to ensure that any employee of an intelligence agency or any member of the Armed Forces assigned to intelligence duties whose identity is classified information is afforded all appropriate assistance to conceal his identity.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Reported to House amended, Part I" stage on August 1, 1980. 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 September 4, 1980: Reported to House from the Committee on the Judiciary, H. Rept. 96-1219 (Part II).
- 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 96th Congress (1979-80), 613 of the 12,581 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 4.9 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?
EDWARD BOLAND (D-MA) introduced it on October 17, 1979, and 13 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 8 Democrats, 5 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 October 17, 1979, 17130 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 16807 days ago, on September 4, 1980.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 96th Congress has not finished by January 3, 1981 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