HB3894, the SAFE Cities Act, would require the Attorney General to identify and publish a list of “anarchist jurisdictions” on the Department of Justice website within 14 days of enactment and update that list at least every 180 days. The bill directs the Attorney General to make these determinations in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The bill defines an anarchist jurisdiction broadly as a state or local government that has refused to take reasonable steps to stop violence and property destruction. In deciding whether a jurisdiction belongs on the list, the Attorney General must consider whether the jurisdiction has policies or practices that limit police intervention during widespread violence, prevents police from policing areas they are otherwise authorized to police, has disempowered or defunded law enforcement, or unreasonably refuses federal law enforcement assistance. The bill also instructs OMB to issue guidance to federal agencies within 30 days encouraging them, to the maximum extent allowed by law, to restrict or disfavor listed jurisdictions in federal grant decisions where agencies have discretion.
If enacted, the bill would not directly change criminal law or local policing authority, but it would create a federal designation system that could affect how the executive branch treats certain states and localities in grant administration. It would also place pressure on jurisdictions identified as failing to respond adequately to violence by potentially reducing their access to discretionary federal funding. The measure is framed as a federal oversight and funding policy rather than a direct mandate on state or local governments.
The available context shows no recorded committee debate or votes, so there is no documented legislative sentiment from hearings or floor action. Based on the bill text and its title, the sponsors appear to support a tougher federal response to jurisdictions they view as permissive of disorder or anti-police policies. At the same time, the bill’s broad terminology and grant-disfavoring directive suggest it could be controversial among opponents who may view it as politically charged, vague, or an intrusion into local governance and policing policy.
Impact
The bill would add a new federal DOJ designation process for states and local governments deemed “anarchist jurisdictions” and would direct OMB to steer federal agencies toward limiting discretionary grants to those jurisdictions where legally permissible. It would not amend state criminal codes, but it could affect state and local governments’ access to federal funding and increase federal scrutiny of policing and public-safety policies.
Sentiment
There is no committee transcript or vote record available, so formal legislative sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call. The bill’s introduction by multiple Republican sponsors and its law-and-order framing indicate support from members favoring stronger federal pressure on jurisdictions associated with unrest, while the absence of recorded consideration leaves opposition arguments undocumented in the provided materials.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be the bill’s broad and politically loaded definition of “anarchist jurisdiction,” the discretion given to the Attorney General and OMB, and the instruction to disfavour listed jurisdictions in federal grant decisions. Supporters are likely to argue it targets jurisdictions that fail to maintain public order or cooperate with law enforcement, while critics are likely to argue it could penalize local policy choices, including police reform or funding decisions, and could be applied inconsistently or subjectively.