PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 17, 2007
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the state-sponsored violence taking place in Zimbabwe represents a serious violation of fundamental human rights and the rule of law and should be condemned by all responsible governments, civic organizations, religious leaders, and international bodies; and (2) the government of Zimbabwe has not lived up to its commitments as a signatory to the Constitutive Act of the African Union and African Charter of Human and Peoples Rights.
Condemns: (1) the government of Zimbabwe's violent suppression of political and human rights; (2) government harassment and intimidation of lawyers attempting to carry out their professional obligations to their clients and repeated failure by police to comply with court decisions; and (3) the harassment of foreign officials, journalists, human rights workers, and others.
Holds individual police, security force members, and militia involved in abuse and torture responsible for the acts that they have committed.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Commends U.S. Ambassador Christopher Dell and other U.S. officials and foreign officials for their support to political detainees and victims of torture and abuse while in police custody or in medical care centers.
Calls on the government of Zimbabwe to end: (1) its violent campaign against fundamental human rights, respect the courts and members of the legal profession, and restore the rule of law; and (2) illegitimate interference in travel abroad by its citizens, especially for humanitarian purposes.
Calls on the leaders of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) and the African Union (AU) to consult with all Zimbabwe stakeholders to intervene with the government of Zimbabwe while applying appropriate pressures to resolve the economic and political crisis.
People & committees
Rep. Lantos, Tom [D-CA-12] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 0, 4 Present (Roll no. 216). (text: CR H3426-3427)
House roll call 216 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 414 - 0, 4 Present (Roll no. 216).(text: CR H3426-3427)
House roll call 216 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3437)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Con. Res. 100.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3426-3429)
Mr. Lantos moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.Con.Res.100 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.Con.Res.100 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.Con.Res.100 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.Con.Res.100 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.