The "SHARE Act of 2025" allows the FBI to share criminal history data with state licensing authorities via interstate compacts for background checks of individuals seeking occupational licenses.
Peter Welch
Senator
VT
The "SHARE Act of 2025" allows the FBI to share criminal history data with state licensing authorities through agreements with state law enforcement for background checks required by interstate compacts. It defines key terms related to licensing and criminal history information and prohibits state licensing authorities from sharing criminal history data with the compact's Commission, other state entities, or the public. The bill permits a state licensing authority to inform a compact Commission whether an applicant's criminal history background check was satisfactory.
FBI Could Share Criminal Background Info for Multi-State Job Licenses Under Proposed SHARE Act
The 'States Handling Access to Reciprocity for Employment Act of 2025,' or SHARE Act, proposes a change to how background checks work for certain jobs that require licenses across state lines. Specifically, it amends the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 to authorize the FBI Director to share an individual's 'criminal history record information' directly with state licensing authorities. This sharing is permitted only when these authorities are part of an 'interstate compact' – essentially agreements between states designed to make it easier for professionals like nurses or therapists to practice in multiple member states.
Streamlining Checks or Sharing Secrets?
So, how would this work? If you're applying for a license in a profession covered by one of these interstate compacts, the state board you apply to could get your FBI rap sheet via their state's law enforcement or identification bureau, provided an agreement is in place. The goal seems to be speeding up the background check process for people who need credentials in several states that are part of the compact. Think of a traveling physical therapist or an engineer working on projects across state borders – this could potentially cut down on redundant paperwork and waiting times.
Guardrails and Gray Areas
The bill does set some boundaries. It explicitly prohibits the state licensing authority from passing along the actual detailed 'criminal history record information' (arrests, charges, outcomes) to the interstate compact's governing body (the 'Commission'), other states within the compact, or the public. However, there's a notable exception: the state authority is allowed to tell the Commission whether an applicant's background check was deemed 'satisfactory.' This raises a practical question: what exactly counts as 'satisfactory,' and who decides? The bill doesn't define this term, leaving room for interpretation by different state boards. While aimed at protecting privacy by limiting data sharing, communicating a simple 'satisfactory' or 'not satisfactory' verdict still relies on that underlying FBI data.
The Bottom Line: Easier Mobility vs. Data Privacy
Ultimately, the SHARE Act tries to balance making it easier for licensed professionals to work across state lines with protecting sensitive personal data. For folks in fields governed by these compacts, it could mean quicker license approvals. But it also means FBI criminal history data gets shared with more state-level entities, even if direct sharing beyond that initial state board is restricted. The effectiveness and fairness hinge on how consistently that 'satisfactory' standard is applied and how securely the information is handled by the state authorities receiving it.