S-3196-117
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 597.
Sponsored by Roger Wicker (R-MS)
What it does
This bill would require the Department of Transportation (DOT) to create a Sexual Assault Advisory Council to review policies on sexual harassment, assault, dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA). It would direct the Maritime Administration to build a tracking system for related incidents, provide mandatory in-person prevention and response training for all midshipmen, and conduct regular surveys of the academy's environment. The bill would also designate a Special Victims' Advisor to give legal help to cadets who are victims of sex-related offenses, direct the Coast Guard to study a serial-offender identification program, and expand Coast Guard authority to suspend or revoke mariners' licenses for sexual harassment or assault.
Who benefits
Current and future midshipmen (cadets) at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy — particularly those who experience or are at risk of sexual harassment or assault. Cadets participating in the Sea Year program, who would gain specific environmental assessments. Victims of sex-related offenses would gain access to a dedicated legal advisor. Faculty and staff at the academy would also be included in the survey process. The broader maritime workforce may benefit from expanded Coast Guard license-revocation authority targeting offenders.
Who is hurt
Mariners holding Coast Guard-issued licenses could face suspension or revocation on expanded grounds related to sexual harassment or assault, which critics may argue broadens punitive authority beyond prior scope. Academy administrators and DOT/Maritime Administration staff would face new compliance, reporting, and operational burdens. Individuals accused of offenses could face license consequences before any criminal conviction, depending on how the expanded revocation authority is applied.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that midshipmen at the USMMA — a federal service academy — deserve the same structured protections against sexual assault and harassment that Congress has mandated at other federal military academies. They contend that without a dedicated tracking system, legal advocate, and mandatory training, victims lack consistent institutional support and offenders face insufficient accountability. Supporters also argue that expanding Coast Guard license-revocation authority sends a clear signal that the maritime profession will not tolerate sexual misconduct, protecting the safety and integrity of the entire industry. The biannual surveys, they say, create an evidence-based feedback loop that allows the academy to identify and correct problems before they escalate.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the bill layers new federal mandates onto a single institution — the USMMA — without clear evidence that existing DOT and Maritime Administration authorities are inadequate to address these issues. They contend that expanding Coast Guard license-revocation authority on harassment grounds, potentially outside a criminal conviction process, raises due process concerns for accused mariners. Critics may also argue that creating additional advisory councils and survey requirements adds bureaucratic overhead without guaranteeing improved outcomes for cadets, and that resources would be better directed toward direct victim services rather than administrative infrastructure. Some may question whether the Coast Guard's serial-offender feasibility study duplicates existing DOD programs without a demonstrated need for a separate maritime version.
Constitutional context
The bill operates primarily under Congress's authority to regulate federal institutions and the maritime industry. The Commerce Clause (Art. I, Sec. 8) and the Necessary and Proper Clause support federal regulation of maritime licensing and the merchant marine. The USMMA is a federally chartered institution, giving Congress direct authority over its policies. The expanded license-revocation authority could implicate the Due Process Clause (5th Amendment), as mariners hold a property interest in their professional licenses — a principle reinforced in administrative law. Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts would independently review any Maritime Administration or Coast Guard regulatory interpretations implementing this bill, rather than deferring to agency readings. Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021) is less directly relevant here, though the expanded takings framework underscores heightened scrutiny of government actions affecting private property interests, including professional licenses.
Checks and balances
The bill shifts administrative authority toward the executive branch — specifically DOT, the Maritime Administration, and the Coast Guard — by granting them new mandates, tracking systems, and expanded license-revocation powers. Congress retains oversight through the required surveys and reporting structures. The judiciary's role is implicitly strengthened in the post-Loper Bright environment, as courts would independently assess whether agency actions implementing this bill stay within the statutory authority Congress grants.
Historical precedent
The Military Academies Sexual Assault and Harassment provisions of the National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA), which established similar advisory councils, tracking systems, and victim legal advocates at West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy, serve as direct legislative precedents for this bill's structure and approach.