Overview

Title

To establish Federal policies and procedures to notify the next-of-kin or other emergency contact upon the death, or serious illness or serious injury, of an individual in Federal custody, to provide model policies for States, units of local government, and Indian Tribes to implement and enforce similar policies and procedures, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

H.R. 2718 is a rule that wants to make sure families are quickly told if someone they know in jail dies, gets badly hurt, or gets very sick, and it also helps states make similar rules.

Summary AI

H.R. 2718, titled the "Family Notification of Death, Injury, or Illness in Custody Act of 2025," aims to ensure that families are quickly informed if a person in federal custody dies, is seriously injured, or becomes seriously ill. The bill mandates the Attorney General to set up notification policies for federal detention agencies and provide model procedures for state and local agencies. These policies include collecting emergency contact information and outlining how notifications should be made compassionately and promptly. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of allowing family members to communicate with medical staff and provides guidance on handling autopsies and personal belongings after a person's death in custody.

Published

2025-04-08
Congress: 119
Session: 1
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2025-04-08
Package ID: BILLS-119hr2718ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
5
Words:
3,941
Pages:
20
Sentences:
78

Language

Nouns: 1,254
Verbs: 334
Adjectives: 258
Adverbs: 43
Numbers: 63
Entities: 133

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.55
Average Sentence Length:
50.53
Token Entropy:
5.52
Readability (ARI):
28.99

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The “Family Notification of Death, Injury, or Illness in Custody Act of 2025” aims to establish federal guidelines for notifying family members or emergency contacts in the unfortunate event of death, serious illness, or injury of individuals in federal custody. The bill seeks to provide a framework for states, local governments, and Indian Tribes to adopt similar measures. It proposes that such policies should ensure timely and sensitive communication with affected families, preserve the confidentiality of collected information, and support the dignity and rights of those in custody.

Summary of Significant Issues

A recurring issue in the bill is the absence of specified budget or funding sources for the implementation of the described policies and procedures. Without dedicated resources, the execution of these measures could face significant hurdles, resulting in resource constraints that threaten to diminish the bill's potential impact. Furthermore, the text incorrectly refers to the Eighteenth Amendment instead of the Eighth Amendment, an error that could detract from the bill's credibility and lead to confusion.

Moreover, the lack of penalties or enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance with the bill's notification requirements may hinder the effectiveness of the proposed policies. Agencies might not feel compelled to adhere to these guidelines without consequences for failing to do so. Additionally, the definitions within the bill, particularly concerning “serious illness,” are broadly stated, potentially leading to inconsistent interpretations across different jurisdictions.

Impact on the Public

For the general public, this bill could provide significant improvements in how families are informed about critical incidents involving loved ones in custody. Timely and compassionate notification can mitigate the trauma and uncertainty often faced by families in such situations. It might foster greater transparency and trust in the correctional and law enforcement systems, leading to better community relations.

However, the effectiveness of such potential benefits hinges on implementing robust enforcement mechanisms and ensuring adequate funding. Without these elements, the bill may fall short of its objectives, limiting its practical application and reducing its impact on those it aims to help.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Families of incarcerated individuals stand to benefit significantly from these policies, as they would have assurance of receiving timely information about critical developments affecting their loved ones. By facilitating better communication, families could be spared from unnecessary anguish due to delays or lack of information.

On the other hand, detention agencies and correctional institutions might face increased administrative responsibilities to comply with the new guidelines. These agencies would require additional support and resources to meet the procedural demands outlined in the bill. Furthermore, healthcare professionals, who are integral to the notification process, may feel overlooked as the bill predominantly emphasizes law enforcement and legal agencies. The involvement and coordination with medical stakeholders are crucial for effectively managing notifications related to health emergencies.

In conclusion, while the proposed legislation holds promise for improving communications regarding individuals in custody, its success will depend on addressing the identified issues, particularly those related to funding, enforcement, definitions, and stakeholder involvement.

Issues

  • The lack of budget or funding source allocations for implementing the policies and procedures described in Section 4 could hinder the effective execution of the proposed measures. This is significant as it may lead to resource constraints and diminish the bill's impact.

  • Section 2's reference to the Eighteenth Amendment is incorrect and could reflect poorly on the bill's credibility. This mistake might lead to confusion and calls into question the precision and attention to detail in the bill's drafting process.

  • The absence of penalties or enforcement mechanisms in Section 4 for agencies failing to comply with notification requirements may undermine the bill's efficacy and accountability measures, ultimately rendering the policies less effective.

  • The broadly defined term 'serious illness' in Section 4 may lead to inconsistent interpretations across agencies, negatively affecting the uniform application of the notification procedures.

  • Section 4 does not address various state regulations regarding handling and notification procedures for deaths in custody, which could result in legal conflicts and inconsistencies across state lines.

  • The discretion given to individuals in custody to opt out of notifications without verifying their informed decision could lead to misunderstandings or no notifications being made in crucial situations, as indicated in Section 4.

  • Section 3 presents ambiguity around the definition of 'custodial record' and may create confusion about what specific information is included, affecting the bill's implementation and understanding.

  • Section 4's lack of specificity on stakeholder involvement, particularly the apparent focus on law enforcement, prosecution, and defense agencies, may sideline other critical stakeholders, like medical professionals, impacting the overall process.

  • The term 'promptly' for appointing an Ombudsman in Section 4 is vague and could lead to delays in oversight and accountability measures being established in a timely manner.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of this Act states that it can be officially called the "Family Notification of Death, Injury, or Illness in Custody Act of 2025".

2. Findings Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

Congress finds that families of individuals who die or become severely ill in custody deserve timely and humane notification, highlighting instances where poor communication exacerbated the suffering of the deceased's relatives. The lack of national standards for notifying families about deaths or critical health situations in prisons can lead to inhumane treatment, and there is a pressing need for transparency and justice, especially with rising death rates in custody and issues such as COVID-19 impacts and delayed release of autopsy results.

3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section defines several terms related to detention, including "custodial record," which refers to an individual's central file while in custody, and "detention agency," which means any government body that can detain people for legal violations. It also describes what being "in the custody of a detention agency" entails and explains "taking custody" as when the agency gains control over an individual, such as during booking or transfer.

4. Emergency contact notification policies and procedures Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines the procedures and policies for notifying emergency contacts when someone in custody at a detention agency passes away or becomes seriously ill or injured. It mandates the timely collection and communication of emergency contact details, describes the notification process and information to be shared, ensures sensitive handling of these notifications, and emphasizes confidentiality and voluntary participation without coercion.

5. Rule of construction Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section ensures that the Act does not impose any legal or financial responsibilities on people who are named as next-of-kin or emergency contacts.