PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jun 22, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Constitutional Amendment - Grants Congress power to prohibit the physical desecration of the U.S. flag.
People & committees
Rep. Cunningham, Randy (Duke) [R-CA-50] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 286 - 130 (Roll no. 296). (text: CR H4904)
House roll call 296 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 286 - 130 (Roll no. 296).(text: CR H4904)
House roll call 296 · Individual votesOn motion table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair Agreed to by recorded vote: 222 - 190 (Roll no. 295).
House roll call 295 · Individual votesMr. Sensenbrenner moved table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair.
Mr. Taylor (MS) appealed the ruling of the chair. The question was then put on sustaining the ruling of the chair.
Point of order sustained against the motion to recommit with instructions.
Mr. Sensenbrenner raised a point of order against the motion to recommit with instructions. Mr. Sensenbrenner stated that the instructions contained in the motion to recommit seek to add an amendment which is not germane. Sustained by the Chair.
Mr. Taylor (MS) moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary. (consideration: CR H4924-4925; text: CR H4924)
On motion to table appeal of the ruling of the Chair Agreed to by recorded vote: 222 - 194 (Roll no. 294).
House roll call 294 · Individual votesMr. Sensenbrenner moved to table appeal of the ruling of the Chair.
By voice vote, the Chair announced that the noes had prevailed on the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair.
Mr. Taylor (MS) appealed the ruling of the chair. The question was then put on sustaining the ruling of the chair.
Point of order sustained against the motion to recommit with instructions.
Mr. Sensenbrenner raised a point of order against the motion to recommit with instructions. Mr. Sensenbrenner stated that the instructions contained in the motion to recommit with instructions were not germane to the joint resolution. Sustained by the Chair.
Mr. Taylor (MS) moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 330, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on the Watt amendment in the nature of a substitute.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with two hours of debate on H.J. Res. 10.
Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 10 with 2 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order. During consideration of H.J. Res. 10 pursuant to H. Res. 330, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the joint resolution to a time designated by the Speaker.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 330. (consideration: CR H4904-4928)
Rule H. Res. 330 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 330 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 10 with 2 hours of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order. During consideration of H.J. Res. 10 pursuant to H. Res. 330, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of the joint resolution to a time designated by the Speaker.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 76.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-131.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-131.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 9.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on the Constitution Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E53)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.J.Res.10 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.J.Res.10 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.J.Res.10 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.J.Res.10 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.