HR-9118-119
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsored by Mark Alford (R-MO)
What it does
This bill would amend Kristen's Act to require that Ashanti Alert notifications include information about whether a missing adult has a developmental disability, Alzheimer's disease, or dementia. It would also update the eligibility language for receiving an Ashanti Alert, replacing the phrase "suffers from a proven mental or physical disability" with more specific diagnostic categories. Additionally, it would require training programs for law enforcement on responding to missing adults and missing children with developmental disabilities, extending that training mandate to states, U.S. territories, and tribal governments.
Who benefits
Adults with developmental disabilities, Alzheimer's disease, or dementia who go missing, as alerts about them would carry more specific and actionable medical information. Families and caregivers of those individuals, who may receive faster and better-targeted responses. Law enforcement agencies, who would receive specialized training on handling these cases. State, territorial, and tribal governments, which would gain access to federally supported training resources. Communities with higher proportions of elderly residents or group homes for people with developmental disabilities.
Who is hurt
There are no clearly identifiable groups who would be directly harmed by this bill. Federal agencies and state/local law enforcement agencies may face modest administrative costs to develop and deliver new training programs. Privacy advocates may raise concerns about disclosing medical diagnoses in public alert systems, though the bill does not mandate disclosure — it requires that the information be included in the alert infrastructure.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that people with Alzheimer's, dementia, and developmental disabilities are among the most vulnerable missing persons — they may be unable to identify themselves, communicate their needs, or navigate safely — and that first responders need specific diagnostic information to respond effectively. They contend that the existing "suffers from a proven mental or physical disability" language is both stigmatizing and imprecise, and that replacing it with named diagnostic categories aligns the law with modern medical and legal standards, potentially reducing delays in issuing alerts for this population.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that including specific diagnostic labels such as "Alzheimer's disease" or "developmental disability" in public alert broadcasts could expose sensitive medical information without the missing person's consent, raising privacy concerns for a population that may not be able to provide it. They contend that the bill does not address the underlying resource gaps — such as insufficient staffing or technology — that cause delays in missing persons responses, and that training mandates without dedicated funding may place unfunded burdens on state, territorial, and tribal law enforcement agencies.
Constitutional context
No significant constitutional issues are raised by this bill. Congress has broad authority under the Commerce Clause and the Spending Clause to condition federal program participation on training requirements and to set standards for federally supported alert networks. No active constitutional tension areas are implicated.
Checks and balances
Congress expands the scope of an existing executive-branch-administered alert program; the Department of Justice retains implementation authority, and states retain discretion over how they deliver the mandated training.
Historical precedent
The Ashanti Alert Act of 2018 established the underlying alert network for missing adults aged 18–64, and Kristen's Act (2003) created the framework for missing adult programs — this bill follows the same incremental amendment pattern used to expand those systems over time.