Kari's Law Reporting Act
Introduced September 8, 2025 · Last action April 22, 2026
Plain English Summary
This bill requires the Federal Communications Commission to publish a report within 180 days on how well multi-line telephone system manufacturers and vendors are following Kari's Law (enacted in 2017, which requires these systems to allow direct 911 calls without dialing an access code). The report must assess compliance, identify obstacles, and recommend improvements or new legislation to the FCC or Congress.
Who benefits
Families and emergency services: the bill supports enforcement of a law requiring direct 911 calling from multi-line phone systems (like those in offices and hotels), which benefits families in emergency situations and 911 dispatch centers. Indirectly, advocates for emergency response accessibility and consumer protection groups benefit from increased FCC oversight.
Who pays / loses
Multi-line telephone system manufacturers and vendors bear potential compliance costs if the FCC report leads to stronger enforcement or new regulations. These businesses must ensure their systems allow direct emergency calls without access codes, which may require engineering modifications or system upgrades.
Funding & Lobbying Interests
Emergency services organizations, family safety advocacy groups (such as those supporting Kari's Law, named after a stabbing victim whose emergency call was delayed by a multi-line phone system requiring an access code), and consumer protection advocates have a stake in this bill. No campaign finance data was provided for the sponsor.
Political Impact
Affected Groups
Emergency services dispatch centers and their ability to receive and respond to 911 calls efficiently; office workers, hotel guests, and occupants of buildings with multi-line phone systems who rely on direct emergency calling; families and survivors of incidents where Kari's Law compliance failures contributed to harm.
Political Subtext
Proponents frame this as an accountability measure ensuring manufacturers follow existing emergency safety law. The underlying Kari's Law (2017) passed with broad bipartisan support after a highly publicized case where a delay in emergency calling may have contributed to death. This bill is a routine oversight mechanism with no apparent partisan divide. Critics might view reporting requirements as burdensome to industry but are unlikely to oppose transparency on emergency safety compliance.
Real-World Stakes
Kari's Law (2017) required multi-line phone systems sold or leased in the U.S. to allow direct 911 calling without access codes. This FCC report will assess whether that law is working as intended. If the report finds widespread non-compliance, it could lead to increased FCC enforcement actions against manufacturers, recalls or retrofits of systems, or new legislation with stricter penalties. Documented cases prior to Kari's Law showed that multi-line system requirements to dial access codes before 911 created dangerous delays in emergency response in offices, schools, and hotels.
What's Inside This Bill
Non-obvious provisions not apparent from the headline summary.
FCC Authority to Expand Scope Beyond Kari's Law
The bill authorizes the FCC to include in its report assessment of compliance with any other 911-related requirements or regulations beyond Kari's Law, potentially expanding the investigation scope beyond the stated statutory requirement.
AffectsMulti-line telephone system manufacturers and vendors who may face compliance assessments for regulations not explicitly mentioned in the bill's title or summary, potentially creating unexpected compliance burdens.
Recommendations as Basis for Future Regulation
The bill requires the FCC to recommend improvements or new legislation, which could serve as the foundation for the FCC to unilaterally implement new rules or for Congress to enact stricter requirements without further legislative debate.
AffectsManufacturers and vendors of multi-line systems who could face new regulatory requirements based on recommendations that may not have undergone full Congressional deliberation.
No Explicit Limitation on Public Disclosure of Compliance Findings
The bill does not specify whether manufacturers' individual compliance assessments or failures will be publicly disclosed, potentially allowing the FCC to publish company-specific non-compliance data.
AffectsSpecific manufacturers identified as non-compliant, who could face reputational harm, consumer pressure, or market disadvantage if individual company compliance data is made public.
Sponsor
Co-sponsors (2)
RRep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]DRep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44]
Vote Record
Passed: 405–5R 199–5 · D 206–0
| Name | Party | State / District | Vote |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12] | D | NC-12 | Yea |
| Rep. Aderholt, Robert B. [R-AL-4] | R | AL-4 | Yea |
| Rep. Aguilar, Pete [D-CA-33] | D | CA-33 | Yea |
| Rep. Alford, Mark [R-MO-4] | R | MO-4 | Yea |
| Rep. Allen, Rick W. [R-GA-12] | R | GA-12 | Yea |
| Rep. Amo, Gabe [D-RI-1] | D | RI-1 | Yea |
| Rep. Amodei, Mark E. [R-NV-2] | R | NV-2 | Yea |
| Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3] | D | AZ-3 | Yea |
| Rep. Arrington, Jodey C. [R-TX-19] | R | TX-19 | Yea |
| Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4] |
Campaign Finance — Primary Sponsor
Top contributing industries
Other$203,611
Technology$11,100
Energy$8,500
Healthcare$6,000
Agriculture$3,000
501(c)(4) disclosure: Contributions from 501(c)(4) "dark money" organizations are not required to be publicly disclosed and are not reflected in the figures above. Data sourced from FEC public disclosure filings.
Community Discussion
Share this bill
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first.