The bills considered in the hearing are S. 818, S. 1106, S. 1558, S. 1995, S. 2572, S. 2658, and S. 2669. Respectively, these bills involve an amendment to Title 18 to limit the insanity defense, reform of the insanity defense, amendment to Title 18 to limit the insanity defense and establish a verdict of not guilty only by reason of insanity, a remedy for procedural and structural defects in the criminal justice system, a strengthening of law enforcement in the areas of violent crime and drug trafficking, amendment to Title 18 to delimit the insanity defense, and amendment to Title 18 to limit the defense of insanity. Subcommittee questioning of the jurors in the Hinckley trial explored jurors' understandings of the legal definition of insanity as a defense, why Hinckley's condition at the time of the offense was perceived by the jurors as conforming to the legal definition of insanity, and the dynamics of the jury deliberations that influenced the jury's decision. Testimony by mental health professionals examined whether the current legal test of insanity makes sense from a psychiatric perspective and in legal terms and whether it can be understood by lay jurors. The testimony and questioning of both criminal justice and mental health professionals also explored the nature and adequacy of procedures for the detention of persons who have been acquitted on insanity grounds. Texts of the bills, written statements, and various relevant studies are included.