# 119-hr-5727: ERRPA 119-hr-5727, ERRPA, is a 119th Congress bill sponsored by Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] (D-TN); status introduced (as of 2026-10-04). - Canonical: https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-5727 - As of: 2026-10-04 - Plain-text twin of the page above; the HTML and this file carry the same facts. ## Facts - Bill: 119-hr-5727 - Congress: 119 - Title: ERRPA - Status: introduced - Introduced: 2025-10-10 - Sponsor: Rep. Cohen, Steve [D-TN-9] (D-TN) - Cosponsors: 0 - Policy area: Crime and Law Enforcement - Touches household money: no - Last recorded action: 2026-10-04 ## Summary **End racial and religious profiling.** This bill would create a nationwide, enforceable ban on profiling by any law enforcement agent and build data collection, complaint, and grant conditions to drive reform. - People and families harmed by profiling could sue in state or federal court for declaratory or injunctive relief. Prevailing private plaintiffs may recover reasonable attorney’s fees, including expert fees, though not from the United States. - Federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies would have to adopt anti‑profiling policies, mandatory training, data collection, and complaint procedures. Grant eligibility for many programs would be conditioned on compliance with those policies, with a 12‑month time frame to meet requirements. - The Attorney General must issue detailed data rules and the Bureau of Justice Statistics must publish annual, nonidentifying reports. The bill funds a two‑year "hit‑rate" demonstration with up to $5 million for grants and $500,000 for evaluation, and authorizes additional grants to develop best practices and tools. ## Provisions PRIA read - Nationwide ban on racial profiling: benefit, high. If enacted, law enforcement would be barred from racial profiling nationwide. Officers could not rely on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation to stop or search people. The ban would cover common encounters like traffic and pedestrian stops, fris… - Right to sue over profiling: benefit, medium. If enacted, people harmed by profiling could sue in state or federal court to stop it. The United States could also bring cases. Showing a disparate impact in routine stops or searches would count as prima facie evidence. Courts could award reasonable attorney and expert fees to winning private pla… - Grants to help end profiling: benefit, medium. If enacted, the Attorney General could fund state, local, and tribal efforts to stop profiling. Grants could pay for training, data tools, feedback systems to flag risks, and complaint or audit programs. An equitable share would go to small and rural agencies. Congress would later decide how much t… - New rules for federal policing: benefit, medium. If enacted, federal law enforcement agencies would need policies to end racial profiling. They would add training, collect data under Attorney General rules, and handle complaints in a meaningful way. The Attorney General could require other needed policies. - Public reports on stops and searches: benefit, medium. If enacted, the Bureau of Justice Statistics would analyze data for disparities and publish a report within 3 years, then yearly. The Attorney General would also report to Congress within 2 years, then yearly, on findings and agency progress. Data shared with the public would exclude personal ident… - Pilot to track hit-rate data: benefit, low. If enacted, the Attorney General could run a two-year pilot in up to five agencies to track hit rates for stops and searches. Sites would be in communities with many minority residents that are not already collecting data. Grants would cover building tools, training staff, and reporting results. An… - Grants tied to anti-profiling rules: mixed, medium. If enacted, the Attorney General would set complaint, audit, and data rules within 6 months. Agencies would have to collect standardized demographic data on stops and keep records at least 4 years. Starting 12 months after enactment, applicants for Byrne JAG or COPS funds would need to certify a pr… - Preserves other rights and tribal immunity: mixed, low. If enacted, the bill would not limit other civil-rights remedies, like lawsuits under section 1983 or title VI. It would not change laws tied to a tribe’s political status. It would not waive tribal sovereign immunity without a tribe’s consent. ## Related bills - 119-hr-3151: SHIPS for America Act of 2025 - 119-hr-7977: Energy Bills Relief Act - 119-hr-7481: Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026 - 119-hr-7973: Momnibus Act - 119-hr-4714: End Polluter Welfare Act of 2025 - 119-hr-3971: Domestic Workers Bill of Rights Act ## Sources - [119-hr-5727 on Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/5727) ## Related - [119-hr-3151: SHIPS for America Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-3151) - [119-hr-7977: Energy Bills Relief Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-7977) - [119-hr-7481: Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-7481) - [119-hr-7973: Momnibus Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-7973) - [119-hr-4714: End Polluter Welfare Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-4714) - [119-hr-3971: Domestic Workers Bill of Rights Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-3971) - [All bills in Congress](https://policyrisk.com/legislation) Source: PRIA, https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-5727 (as of 2026-10-04).