One-Stop Pilot Program Extension Act (HR 9388). A bill extending the TSA One‑Stop Security pilot. Sponsored by Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R‑FL).
Data as of August 18, 2026 · Refresh this data →
Sponsored by Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-28] · 1 cosponsor
Plain-English Summary
One-Stop Pilot Program Extension Act This bill revises and extends the One Stop Security program of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Under this pilot program, eligible passengers and their checked baggage arriving in the United States from certain foreign airports with connecting flights may be eligible to continue without additional TSA security re-screening. The bill extends the pilot program through December 23, 2032, from the current December 23, 2028. The bill also revises the security requirements for excluding checked baggage from additional TSA security re-screening. Among other things, the bill specifies that a passenger must be unable to access their checked baggage until arrival at their final destination and that U.S. Customs and Border Protection must have received timely images of the baggage from the participating foreign airport prior to a passenger’s arrival in the United States.
Current Status
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
What Problem This Addresses
The current TSA One‑Stop Security pilot allows eligible international passengers to bypass additional domestic re‑screening, but it is set to expire on December 23, 2028. Without extension, airlines and travelers could face longer processing times and increased operational costs. The bill addresses the need to maintain streamlined security for qualifying passengers while updating baggage verification requirements.
Outlook
The bill cleared the House with a voice vote on July 13, 2026, and was received in the Senate on July 14, 2026, where it was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Its future depends on Senate committee action and potential floor consideration, which may or may not occur. If the Senate advances the measure, it could proceed to a final vote; otherwise, it may stall.
Arguments From Supporters
Proponents argue the extension preserves a proven efficiency gain for travelers and airlines, reducing wait times without compromising security. The revised baggage imaging requirement is presented as a safeguard that maintains risk‑based screening standards. Supporters also note that the pilot’s continuation aligns with broader transportation modernization goals.
Arguments From Opponents
No organized opposition has been identified in the official record or public statements to date.
Where Both Sides Agree
Both supporters and any potential critics acknowledge the importance of maintaining aviation security and preventing threats. There is consensus that any program changes must include reliable verification of checked baggage before entry into the United States.
Core Disagreement
Supporters emphasize efficiency and passenger convenience, while critics—though not formally organized—might raise concerns about the adequacy of the revised imaging and access restrictions for baggage security. Disagreement may also arise over the appropriate balance between streamlined processing and additional oversight mechanisms.
Constitutional Basis Cited
The sponsor did not cite a specific constitutional authority for the bill, and no constitutional challenges have been documented. The legislation falls within Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce and national transportation safety, which are commonly invoked bases for similar measures.
Economic Considerations
If enacted, the extension could reduce airline operational costs associated with repeated baggage screening and improve passenger throughput, potentially yielding modest economic benefits. However, the actual financial effect may depend on the volume of eligible travelers and the costs of implementing the new imaging requirements, which could offset some savings.
Sections beyond the plain-English summary are AI-synthesized analysis based on the sourced legislative record from Congress.gov, read, edited where needed, and approved by a human editor before publication. Full methodology: Editorial & Methodology.
← All Records