The End Domestic Terrorism Act adds a new federal offense, 18 U.S.C. 2332j, for mass killings where at least three people are killed in a single incident with a machinegun, a destructive device, or a covered semiautomatic weapon. The offense triggers when specified interstate-commerce conditions apply and at locations such as schools, places of worship, government buildings, and large public venues.
It also expands the definition of “covered semiautomatic weapon” to include certain rifles, shotguns, and parts designed to increase firing rate. The bill then requires annual and public reporting on charges under 2332j and related offenses, including demographic data about those charged and the resources used in responses.
In addition, it broadens demographic reporting in certain surveillance contexts and mandates a public-facing summary of costs and victims’ support after charges are filed. The net effect is to deter mass killings by elevating penalties and increasing transparency around offenses and enforcement.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a new federal offense, 2332j, for mass killings using machineguns or covered semiautomatic weapons and defines the weapon categories and jurisdictional triggers. It also adds reporting requirements tied to charges under 2332j and related statutes.
Who It Affects
Directly affects federal prosecutors, law enforcement, and the operators of listed venues (e.g., schools, places of worship, government buildings, retail locations). It also implicates state and local agencies through cost reporting and the Crime Victims Fund.
Why It Matters
Establishes a clear federal hook for mass-killing cases with interstate elements, clarifies weapon classifications, and institutionalizes data and cost transparency to inform policy and enforcement decisions.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a new federal crime—mass killings using machineguns or covered semiautomatic weapons—when at least three people are killed in a single incident and certain interstate connections apply. The offense carries severe penalties, including life in prison, and applies only under defined circumstances and at enumerated kinds of locations (schools, government buildings, hospitals, malls, venues, and other public spaces).
It also expands the set of weapons that count as “covered semiautomatic weapons,” with criteria focusing on features that enhance concealability or rate of fire, and it includes weapons that resemble AK- or AR-type firearms. The statute also requires the Attorney General to file annual reports on charges under the new 2332j provision and on related charges under 2339a, detailing victims, demographics, and the weapon used.
In addition, the bill broadens demographic reporting in interception-related records and, within 180 days of charges, requires a public DOJ report detailing attendees, costs, lost revenue, and victim-support expenditures.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill creates 18 U.S.C. 2332j for mass killings using machineguns or covered semiautomatic weapons.
A wide set of locations and interstate commerce conditions create federal jurisdiction for the new offense.
‘Covered semiautomatic weapon’ is defined through detailed feature-based criteria (A–F) including rifles, shotguns, and accessories.
The Attorney General must report annually on charges under 2332j and 2339a, including demographics and weapon details.
Public-facing reporting on incident costs, lost business, and victim assistance is required within 180 days of charges.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This act may be cited as the End Domestic Terrorism Act. The section establishes the act’s formal name and sets the stage for the new mass-killing offense and related reporting obligations.
Mass killings using machineguns or covered semiautomatic weapons
Section 2 adds 18 U.S.C. 2332j, creating a federal offense for mass killings (3+ dead in a single incident) committed with a machinegun, a destructive device, or a covered semiautomatic weapon under specified interstate or jurisdictional circumstances. The offense carries imprisonment for any term of years or life. The section also defines the triggers (circumstances) and the list of locations where the offense may be considered under federal jurisdiction, including schools, places of worship, medical facilities, government buildings, venues, and retail or office locations, among others. It also broadens the weapon definitions and ties them to existing statutes (machinegun and destructive device).
Reports on charges filed for use of weapons of mass destruction and providing material support to terrorists
Section 3 requires the Attorney General to prepare and submit to Congress annual reports on cases where charges were filed under 2332j or 2339a in the previous year. The report for 2332j must include offense date, injuries, fatalities, demographics of charged individuals, and weapon used; the 2339a portion must describe the type of support alleged, recipients, and demographics of those charged.
Inclusion of demographic information in interception reports
Section 4 amends 18 U.S.C. 2519(2)(c) to require that demographic details (age, gender, race, ethnicity, and nationality) accompany any information available in intercepts concerning arrestees, adding a demographic lens to surveillance-related records.
Public reporting requirement
Section 5 mandates a publicly accessible DOJ report within 180 days of charges under 2332j. The report must cover the number of individuals present at the offense location, total government expenditures for response and victim services, lost business revenue, and the total amount of assistance provided through programs like the Crime Victims Fund.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Criminal Justice across all five countries.
Explore Criminal Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Federal prosecutors and the Department of Justice gain a clearer, codified trigger for prosecuting mass-killing cases with interstate elements and enhanced data collection.
- Victims and survivor advocacy groups benefit from demographic transparency and data about resource use and outcomes.
- Institutions at risk of mass violence (schools, places of worship, medical facilities, government buildings, retail venues, and large public events) gain a deterrent effect from the enhanced penalties and a framework for safety planning and accountability.
- Policy makers and researchers gain new data streams and public reporting to assess enforcement, costs, and impacts of mass-killing incidents.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal government bears the cost of implementing and enforcing the new offense and compiling annual reports.
- State and local governments may incur costs related to security improvements, incident response, and accurately attributing costs in the public reporting.
- Venues and facilities listed in the location triggers (schools, malls, theaters, government buildings) could experience increased scrutiny and potential security upgrades or compliance costs.
- Courts and prosecutors may face greater caseloads from prosecutions under the new offense and related charges.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether expanding weapon definitions and imposing harsh penalties at sensitive, high-traffic locations will meaningfully deter violence without creating enforcement ambiguity or civil-liberties concerns, given the evolving landscape of mass-casualty threats and the need for practical, enforceable standards.
The bill’s broad weapon definitions and location triggers raise questions about enforcement scope and potential overbreadth. While the aim is deterrence and accountability, the detailed baselines for what constitutes a “covered semiautomatic weapon” depend on technical specifications and future regulatory actions (including AG determinations under rulemaking).
The reporting requirements promote transparency but also aggregate sensitive information about victims and arrestees, which raises privacy considerations and the need for careful data handling. The public reporting of costs and business impact is valuable for accountability but could influence how jurisdictions allocate resources after incidents.
Overall, the act shifts there-and-back responsibilities across federal and local actors, balancing deterrence with transparency and the risk of administrative complexity in implementation.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.