Kayleigh’s Law Act of 2026

Enumerated powers · passes

The federal government has enumerated power under Article I, Section 8, Clause 6 (to define and punish offenses against the law of nations) and, more relevantly, under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18) to enact laws governing federal criminal procedure. The bill applies to defendants convicted of federal violent or sex crimes, which are within Congress's authority to define and punish. It does not exceed federal jurisdiction by regulating purely state crimes.

Bill of Rights · passes

The bill does not implicate the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, or Ninth Amendments. It does not restrict speech, assembly, or religion; it does not involve searches or seizures; it does not affect trial rights; and it does not impose cruel or unusual punishment. The no-contact order is a civil regulatory condition of sentencing, not a criminal penalty, and does not violate the Eighth Amendment. The Tenth Amendment is not implicated because the bill operates within federal criminal jurisdiction.

Individual liberty · passes · severity: minor

The bill restricts a convicted felon's liberty by prohibiting contact with a victim, but this restriction is directly tied to the conviction for a violent or sex crime. The government has a compelling interest in protecting victims from further harm. The restriction is narrowly tailored to the offense and does not restrict lawful activities unrelated to the victim. The burden on the individual is justified by the conviction and the need to prevent future harm.

Decentralization · passes

The bill addresses federal criminal procedure, which cannot be handled by individuals, local communities, or states because it applies to federal courts and federal crimes. The federal government is the appropriate level to regulate its own judicial processes. The bill does not consolidate decision-making upward; it merely sets a uniform rule for federal courts, which is within federal authority.

Due process and takings · raises concerns · severity: minor

The bill's lifetime no-contact order, without mandatory periodic review, raises substantive due process concerns. While the government has a legitimate interest in protecting victims, a permanent restriction on association with a specific person, imposed at sentencing, may be overbroad if the defendant's circumstances change (e.g., rehabilitation, victim's consent). The bill does provide procedures for termination or suspension, but the lack of automatic review could be seen as arbitrary. This is a minor due process issue that can be fixed by adding a review mechanism.