HR1955 fails to provide a meaningful criterion to differentiate between "violent radicalization", and legitimate peaceful opposition. Until this is done, HB1955 is constitutionally unacceptable.

From the Bill of Rights Defense Committee
West Region Organizer:
PO Box 51434
Eugene, OR 97405
PH: 541 683-1604
FX: 609 784-1604

01/18 08:
According to an obscure paragraph in CQ Politics on December 14, the Senate version of the bill "died a quiet death" in early December. Here's the CQ Politics article. You'll have to dig deep to find the reference to Violent Radicalization, or use "Find" and search on "radical" to find it more easily.

For more information on the bill that is currently resting in peace, see BORDC's legislation page:

S 1959 (the twin of HR 1955, which passed 404-6 in October) is still before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee in the Senate. According to one source, Sen. Susan Collins, the sponsor of the bill in the Senate, realizes there has been opposition to the bill, and is open to hearing from her constituents.

Others on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (where the bill now waits to be passed or not passed):



Legislators need to be aware of the difference between "terrorism" and legitimate, constitutionally protected dissent.

If your senator is on the committee, you might be able to help stop this bill from ever reaching the floor for a vote by meeting locally with the senator's aides. They do listen to their aides, especially when groups of constituents take the time to visit with and help educate them about the local feeling on a particular piece of legislation. Letters to the editor and opinion editorials that are published, clipped and sent to senators are also helpful. For tips on how to arrange meetings with aides, see:


Jan 21 queried:
Entry HR 1955 gives a brief introduction, then under "details" gave a long blow by blow description:

The entry for S 1959 gives a brief introduction, but the "details" are identical to the introduction: