Condemning the use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment in the United States and other countries, and expressing support for victims of those practices.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 26, 2002
Declares that Congress: (1) condemns the use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment in the United States and other countries; (2) recognizes the United Nations International Day in Support of the Victims of Torture and expresses support for all victims of torture who are struggling to overcome the physical scars and psychological effects of such practices; and (3) encourages training law enforcement personnel and others in the prevention of torture and other forms of cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment.Encourages the Secretary of State to seek the adoption of a commitment to: (1) treat confessions and other evidence obtained through torture or other forms of cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment, as inadmissible in any legal proceeding; and (2) prohibit, in law and in practice, incommunicado detention.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1158-1159)
Referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Con.Res.431 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Con.Res.431 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Con.Res.431 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Con.Res.431 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.