PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 5, 2026. 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.120 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.120 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.120 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.120 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.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-09-11 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This resolution proposes a constitutional amendment requiring a break after two consecutive Senate terms or five consecutive House terms. Affected people would become eligible again one year after their last counted term ends. The proposal would change the Constitution only if three-fourths of state legislatures ratify it within seven years after submission.
No person who has been a Senator for two consecutive terms shall again be eligible for election or appointment to the Senate until the date that is one year after the end of such second consecutive term.
No person who has been a Representative for five consecutive terms shall again be eligible for election to the House of Representatives until the date that is one year after the end of the fifth consecutive term.
which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification
The resolution proposes an amendment to the Constitution, rather than an ordinary statute. Ratification would require approval by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states within seven years after submission for ratification.
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification
A person who served two consecutive Senate terms would be ineligible for election or appointment to the Senate until one year after the second term ended. This would be a temporary restriction, not a lifetime limit.
No person who has been a Senator for two consecutive terms shall again be eligible for election or appointment to the Senate until the date that is one year after the end of such second consecutive term.
A person who served five consecutive House terms would be ineligible for election to the House until one year after the fifth term ended. This would also be a temporary restriction.
No person who has been a Representative for five consecutive terms shall again be eligible for election to the House of Representatives until the date that is one year after the end of the fifth consecutive term.
A term served to fill a vacancy would count toward the consecutive-term limit only if the person served more than three years in the Senate or more than one year in the House. Service exactly at either threshold would not count.
any term a person serves as a Senator or Representative to fill a vacancy shall not be included in determining the number of consecutive terms that the person has been a Senator or Representative unless the period of time for which the person fills the vacancy is greater than three years in the case of a Senator or greater than one year in the case of a Representative.
Any term that began before ratification would be excluded from the consecutive-term count, including a term still underway when ratification occurred.
any term that began before the date of the ratification of this article shall not be included in determining the number of consecutive terms that a person has been a Senator or Representative.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated June 5, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on September 11, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-06-05T08:07:49Z. 2025-09-11: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-09-11: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-09-11. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Its counting and transition rules are general features of the proposed limits. This conclusion does not extend to other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jun 5, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI