SB1766 creates two new federal offenses protecting public safety personnel: killing and assaulting officers, judges, and related personnel. It expands who qualifies as a protected public safety officer and ties the offenses to cross-border and interstate activity.
It also requires the U.S. Sentencing Commission to issue guidelines with mandatory enhancements, and it amends the federal code to reflect these new offenses.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill adds 18 U.S.C. § 1123—Killing of public safety officers—and § 120—Assaults of public safety officers. It defines protected roles and “federally funded” officers, and creates penalties that scale with the severity of the offense and the use of weapons, plus a directive to the U.S. Sentencing Commission for guideline enhancements.
Who It Affects
Directly affects federal, state, and local public safety personnel who fall under the new definitions, including law enforcement, firefighters, chaplains, and rescue squad/ambulance crew members, plus federal judges and publicly funded officers.
Why It Matters
By federalizing protections for officers and establishing guideline-driven penalties, the bill aims to deter violent acts against front-line public safety personnel and harmonize punishment with the severity of offenses when interstate channels or commerce are involved.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Protect Our Heroes Act of 2025 adds two new federal crimes to Title 18. The first criminalizes the killing of a public safety officer (1123), and the second criminalizes assaulting a public safety officer (120).
The bill defines who qualifies as a public safety officer in broad terms—covering law enforcement officers, firefighters (including volunteers), judges, and other personnel connected to public safety through public agencies that receive federal funding or involvement. The offenses apply when acts happen during official duties or because of duty performance, and they also cover scenarios where travel, interstate channels, or commerce are involved.
Penalties are severe, with minimums and, in some cases, the possibility of life imprisonment or death, depending on the outcome and circumstances. The bill also requires the U.S. Sentencing Commission to issue or amend guidelines to provide at least five offense-level enhancements in cases where a suspect lures a victim to a location for the purpose of killing or assaulting them.
Finally, the bill amends the table of sections to insert new offenses (1123 and 120) into the federal code. The net effect is to raise federal protection for public safety personnel and align federal penalties with the seriousness of threats and violence against these workers, across the entire United States and in situations that cross borders or involve interstate activity.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Adds 18 U.S.C. §1123 for Killing of public safety officers with defined terms and crossing conditions.
Adds 18 U.S.C. §120 for Assaults on public safety officers, with injury-based penalty tiers.
Broadens who is protected (including volunteers, chaplains, rescue squads, and federally funded officers).
Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to issue at least a 5-level enhancement guideline for luring offenses.
Amends the table of sections to add the new offenses, clarifying federal coverage across state lines and interstate commerce.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Killing of public safety officers—offense and definitions
This section adds a new federal offense, §1123, defining who qualifies as a federally funded or protected public safety officer and establishing the circumstances under which killing or attempting to kill such an officer is unlawful. It ties the offense to the officer’s official duties and to the manner in which the act occurs, including cross-border travel or use of interstate channels. The provision relies on established definitions (e.g., for federal law enforcement officers, judges, and other public safety personnel) to create a broad but concrete protection net.
Key definitions used in the killing offense
Expanded terms include ‘federally funded public safety officer,’ ‘public safety officer,’ and related categories such as firefighters (including volunteers) and judicial or public agency personnel. The section also clarifies that public safety officers encompass various roles within public agencies, including court personnel, and sets the scope for what counts as a protected individual under the new offense.
Assaults of public safety officers—offense and definitions
This section adds §120, creating a separate federal offense for assaulting a public safety officer. It mirrors the structure of §1123 by defining protected individuals and identifying circumstances that trigger the offense, including cross-border travel, use of interstate channels, and involvement of weapons or interference with commerce. It covers current and former officers and emphasizes acts carried out during or in connection with official duties.
Penalties and guideline directive
The penalties for §1123 and §120 are tiered by the severity of harm and whether a weapon was used, with minimum terms and, in certain cases, life imprisonment or death for killing offenses, and enhanced punishments for assaults. The bill also directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to issue or amend guidelines to add not less than a 5-level enhancement when it’s proven beyond a reasonable doubt that a suspect lured a victim to a location for the purpose of attacking them, ensuring consistent, proportionate punishment.
Table of sections amended
To reflect the new offenses, the bill amends the table of sections for Title 18, inserting 1123 (Killing of public safety officers) and 120 (Assaults of public safety officers) at the end of the respective chapters. This ensures the new offenses are codified and searchable within the federal code.
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 and state public safety officers who fall within the bill’s broadened definitions gain enhanced protection and clearer federal recourse when violent acts occur, particularly in cross-border scenarios.
- Judicial officers and federally funded public safety personnel are explicitly protected under the new offenses, reinforcing safety for judges and court staff who perform official duties.
- Public safety agencies that receive federal funding benefit from a unified federal framework for prosecuting violent acts against personnel, potentially improving deterrence and response.
- Families and colleagues of officers are supported by stronger penalties and the expectation of accountability for violent crimes against those in public safety roles.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local and state agencies may incur costs related to training, compliance, and reporting to align with the new offenses and cross-border enforcement considerations.
- The federal judiciary and U.S. Sentencing Commission face added workload and budget considerations to implement and update guidelines, including possible training and outreach.
- Prosecutors and defense teams may experience longer or more complex cases as the new offenses interact with existing statutes and procedural rules, potentially increasing case management demands.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between providing robust, uniform protection for public safety personnel and avoiding excessive federal reach into local policing and state criminal law. The bill expands who is protected and elevates penalties, but doing so risks duplicative or inconsistent punishments with existing state statutes and raises constitutional and practical questions about enforcement and funding.
The bill’s breadth—especially the inclusion of federally funded officers and the cross-border/commerce triggers—raises questions about federal overreach into state and local policing domains. While the intent is to deter violence against public safety personnel, the scope could blur lines between federal and state criminal jurisdiction, creating harmonization and enforcement challenges.
The penalties for killing an officer include life imprisonment or even the death penalty, and the assault offense uses tiered sentencing tied to injury severity and weapon use, which may intensify sentencing disparities across jurisdictions unrealistically. The directive to the U.S. Sentencing Commission to publish guidelines with significant enhancements for ‘luring’ scenarios adds another layer of federalization that could affect plea negotiations and trial dynamics.
Finally, provisions to define “federally funded public safety officer” hinge on federal funding and agency structure, which can be fluid and subject to change, potentially complicating who is protected and how offenses are charged across different states and localities.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.