PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H3613)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 24, 2001
Urges the Republic of Italy to immediately return Ludwig Maximilian Koons to the United States and to the custody of his father, Jeffrey Koons, in accordance with the divorce judgment of the New York Supreme Court on December 9, 1994.Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) pursuant to Article 36 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the United States should intervene in the proceeding pending before the European Court of Human Rights, Jeffrey Lynn Koons v. Italy, case no. 68183/01, to request the Republic of Italy to remedy the violations of international law committed against Mr. Koons and his son; and (2) pending a final decision by the Republic of Italy regarding the permanent return of Ludwig to the United States, the United States should request that the Republic of Italy authorize Ludwig to visit his father in his New York residence on a temporary basis.
People & committees
Rep. Lampson, Nick [D-TX-9] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H3613)
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H5966-5967)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.237 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.237 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.237 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.237 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.