Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1051, I call up the bill (H.R. 6691) to amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the definition of ``crime of violence'', and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration. Mr.…
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1051, I call up the bill (H.R. 6691) to amend title 18, United States Code, to clarify the definition of ``crime of violence'', and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 6691.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6691, the Community Safety and Security Act of 2018. This legislation provides critical clarity to the definition of ``crime of violence'' in the United States Code in order to keep violent criminals off the streets and ensure the safety of our communities.
In the recent U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Dimaya, the term ``crime of violence'' was determined to be unconstitutionally vague. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Congress to act to provide the necessary clarity in the law that allows our law enforcement and our judicial systems to work and, importantly, to protect the victims of these violent crimes.
The Community Safety and Security Act of 2018 provides that clarity by precisely and legally defining the phrase ``crime of violence'' and the related criminal acts that, when combined with the element of force are, indeed, considered violent.
They include crimes such as voluntary manslaughter, attempted kidnapping, lewd acts upon a child, sexual assault, assault on a police officer, domestic violence, murder, and all other crimes that a normal, regular individual would think of as a violent crime, as well as human trafficking.
In my State of Georgia, metro Atlanta is well known as a haven for human and sex trafficking, and as a recruiting center for vulnerable young people. In 2017 alone, it was reported that nearly 3,600 females and more than 600 males were trafficked. These are just the reported cases. Thousands more go unreported every year.
This legislation that I bring forward today provides essential legal clarity to ensure that crimes like human trafficking and others in the bill are deemed legally as crimes of violence.
Failure to address this issue would foster vagueness and uncertainty in our courts, and potentially disrupt the prosecution of certain crimes of violence, like human trafficking, child abuse, domestic violence, and other acts that any reasonable individual would consider a crime of violence.
This legislation has the support of a number of organizations, including the Fraternal Order of Police and the National Association of Police Organizations.
In a recent letter to Speaker Ryan and Leader Pelosi, the Fraternal Order of Police noted that ``there are numerous convictions and pending cases that would be jeopardized'' in the wake of the Dimaya decision.
The Community Safety and Security Act of 2018 is another step that we, as Congress, can take, that we must take, in order to make our communities the safest that they can possibly be. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, to my colleague from Texas, I want to say good morning to her as well and also recognize her significant efforts in criminal justice reform, and indeed I was proud to be able to support that recent piece of legislation that came through our committee as well.
A couple of points. I very much appreciate the concerns that have been raised, Mr. Speaker, but I assure you that this law, as crafted, does not go beyond the scope contemplated when Section 16 was originally crafted.
This is a responsible, carefully crafted piece of legislation that does what the United States Supreme Court recommended. It enumerates what crimes are crimes of violence so that there can be no vagueness and people know what the law is. In fact, it goes to protect due process, Mr. Speaker.
This is our responsibility as legislators. And indeed, Mr. Speaker, time is of the essence, given the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, and indeed
there would be substantial harmful effects if we fail as Congress to act today on this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Marino).
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, first, I certainly appreciate my colleagues and the fact that they have read the bill so very thoroughly.
I must reiterate, however, that this legislation is not overly broad. In fact, it specifically maintains the status quo. And we drew those lines because
we crafted the bill to maintain that status quo.
The legislation will not be able to fix some of the outrageous injustices that have occurred when courts have found certain offenses do not qualify as crimes of violence. For example, where a defendant who has a conviction for sexual abuse escapes more serious consequences because the State's sexual abuse statute also encompasses certain consensual conduct and, therefore, it was not categorically a crime of violence even when and where this particular defendant committed horrific acts that were most certainly not consensual.
Some of these injustices must be fixed through State legislation. We refrained specifically from expanding the law, despite the very human desire to want to fix these kinds of injustices and recognizing that the States have the duty to fix this.
This legislation, Mr. Speaker, does affect people's lives. Specifically, it is going to affect the lives of individuals who are victims of violent crimes.
A couple more points have been raised. First of all, on the issue of fleeing, we have heard the concerns that the written text is a little bit too broad on fleeing. Well, let me just correct that. Courts have found fleeing to be a crime of violence. This is not an expansion. This applies only in vehicles. It is not on foot.
The Seventh Circuit called this specific conduct ``inherently aggressive.'' The 11th Circuit reasoned that ``fleeing from law enforcement, an individual has already resorted to an extreme measure to avoid arrest, signaling that he is likely prepared to resort to the use of physical force.''
So, Mr. Speaker, we approach this bill with great diligence. Time, as I said, is of the essence, given the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision. We heard from the police officers association that they are very concerned about the fact that pending cases and convictions could be effective if Congress does not act. Indeed, substantial harm will occur if we fail to act.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, just one clarification to the most recent comments. The part that was left out in those comments was the fact that it would apply only if a violent crime is committed.
May I inquire as to how much time remains.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).
Mr. Speaker, I have two additional speakers.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Holding).
Mr. Speaker, again, I want to make the point that time really is of the essence in being able to protect due process and, equally and perhaps more importantly, being able to protect victims of certain violent crimes.
For example, right now, today, under Fourth Circuit precedent, sex trafficking is not considered a crime of violence; and I think that most of us would all agree that sex trafficking is, indeed, a crime of violence.
Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Marino).
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, first let me address the criticism regarding burglary being too broad in the way it is addressed in the legislation. This is the Federal generic definition of burglary and one that courts have found satisfies the definition of ``crime of violence.''
Mr. Speaker, the detractors of this fail to recognize that these definitions are not an expansion of actual State laws but only seek to cover the generic definition and reasonable iterations found in State law.
In fact, prior to the Dimaya Supreme Court case, the Supreme Court had previously unanimously agreed in Leocal v. Ashcroft that ``burglary is the classic example of a crime of violence under subsection 16(b).''
The Community Safety and Security Act of 2018 is a necessary, crucial piece of legislation that will fix a major loophole in our system. We squarely address the issues raised by the United States Supreme Court, eliminating the vagueness, giving notice, and explaining which offenses Congress intended to cover when they had first crafted the language in clause 16(b) from the very beginning.
By moving the legislation, we are avoiding potentially dangerous consequences of giving very serious, dangerous criminals a pass. We have examined the case law surrounding these offenses; we have considered the equities; we have been deliberative; and we have shown great restraint in many ways.
Congress cannot sit idly by and allow criminals to disrupt our communities because of this loophole. This bill is a product of necessity, and we do not have the privilege to squabble over hypotheticals that ultimately have no bearing on real-life applications of this law. We must move to protect our communities to prevent more victims of crime.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I can assure my colleagues that this bill is not overly broad. It is not, as some have irresponsibly stated, a ``dangerous expansion of criminal law.'' Instead, it is a carefully crafted response to the U.S. Supreme Court's recommendations in the Dimaya case. Frankly, it is just the sort of bill that our system was designed to produce.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for this bill. Vote ``yes,'' and in doing so, demonstrate to your constituents your commitment to protecting law-abiding Americans from violent criminals. It is a simple choice. Make the correct one and vote ``yes.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
