PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and 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.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and 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 Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and 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 Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and 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
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.R.10008 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.R.10008 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.R.10008 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.R.10008 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 · 2026-07-30 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.
The proposed Turkey Human Rights Promotion Act would restrict U.S. security assistance to Turkey unless human rights conditions are met, while allowing case-by-case waivers for vital U.S. national security interests. It would require assistance for political prisoners and expanded support for independent journalism and civil society. It also recommends sanctions and other responses if Turkey fails to address abuses; those recommendations express Congress’s view rather than require those actions. The proposal would affect U.S. agencies, Turkey’s government, and people and organizations working on human rights in Turkey.
This Act may be cited as the Turkey Human Rights Promotion Act of 2026.
No funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for Foreign Military Financing, Foreign Military Sales, or other security assistance programs for the Government of Turkey may be obligated or expended unless the Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional committees
The Secretary of State may waive the application of subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis if the Secretary determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that such waiver is in the vital national security interest of the United States
The Secretary of State shall provide assistance to civil society organizations in Turkey that work to secure the release of prisoners of conscience and political prisoners in Turkey, and to current and former prisoners of conscience and political prisoners in Turkey
The Secretary of State and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, as appropriate, shall expand support for— (1) independent journalists and media outlets in Turkey, including those operating in exile; (2) civil society organizations documenting human rights violations or providing assistance to victims of politically motivated persecution
It is the sense of Congress that if the Government of Turkey does not promptly take effective steps to address the human rights violations described in this Act— (1) the President of the United States should impose sanctions
The bill’s findings describe a longstanding U.S.–Turkey alliance and allege intensified repression since the July 2016 coup attempt, including against journalists, lawyers, opposition politicians, and minority communities. These are the proposal’s stated grounds for action, not independently established findings of this analysis.
Congress makes the following findings: (1) The United States values its longstanding alliance with the Republic of Turkey, its friendship with the Turkish people, and remains committed to supporting a healthy Turkish democracy.
Since the attempted coup of July 2016, the Government of Turkey has intensified its crackdown on freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, and association.
In the years following the coup attempt, the Government of Turkey has pursued a sweeping and systematic campaign of domestic and transnational repression targeting journalists, academics, students, lawyers, opposition politicians, Kurds, Alevis, and individuals associated with the Hizmet (Gulen) Movement.
The proposal defines a political prisoner through several alternative grounds: detention violating specified fundamental rights, detention solely for political reasons without an offense, politically motivated excessive or discriminatory detention, or clearly unfair proceedings apparently connected to political motives.
The term political prisoner means a person who has been deprived of his or her personal liberty if— (A) the detention has been imposed in violation of one of the fundamental guarantees set out in the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly— (i) freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; (ii) freedom of expression and information; and (iii) freedom of assembly and association; (B) the detention has been imposed for purely political reasons without connection to any offense; (C) for political motives, the length of the detention or its conditions are clearly out of proportion to the offense of which the person has been found guilty or is suspected; (D) for political motives, he or she is detained in a discriminatory manner as compared to other persons; or (E) the detention is the result of proceedings which were clearly unfair and appear to be connected with political motives of the authorities.
A prisoner of conscience would mean someone imprisoned or otherwise physically restricted solely for peacefully exercising human rights who has neither used violence nor advocated violence or hatred.
The term prisoner of conscience means any person who— (A) is imprisoned or otherwise physically restricted solely for the peaceful exercise of the individual’s human rights; and (B) has not used violence or advocated violence or hatred.
Required reports and certifications would go to the Senate Foreign Relations and Appropriations Committees and the House Foreign Affairs and Appropriations Committees.
The term appropriate congressional committees means— (A) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and (B) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.
unless the Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional committees
the Secretary of State shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the implementation of this Act.
The proposed U.S. policy would support democracy and human rights in Turkey and oppose misuse of counterterrorism powers. It would treat politically motivated counterterrorism detainees as political prisoners or prisoners of conscience, as appropriate, unless probative evidence of specific criminal misconduct is presented in proceedings meeting international fair-trial standards. It would also call for diplomatic efforts toward unconditional release and clearing their charges.
It is the policy of the United States— (1) to support democracy, peace, and human rights in Turkey, and to press the Government of Turkey to comply with its obligations under the North Atlantic Treaty; (2) to oppose the abuse of counterterrorism laws and authorities, including targeting journalists, political opponents, dissidents, recognized and unrecognized ethnic and religious minorities, and others engaged in exercising their right to freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, or association; (3) to consider those detained or imprisoned under counterterrorism authorities on politically motivated grounds to be prisoners of conscience or political prisoners, as appropriate, unless there is probative evidence of specific criminal misconduct presented in proceedings that comply with international fair trial standards; (4) to use all diplomatic tools to advocate that all prisoners of conscience and political prisoners in Turkey should be unconditionally released and charges expunged
The policy statement would call for pressure on Turkey to change laws that unjustly target peaceful activity or violate fair-trial rights. It would oppose exports to Turkey of surveillance technology that could monitor journalists, dissidents, political opponents, or minority communities; condemn repression of critics abroad; seek protection of United States persons and lawful permanent residents from harassment, intimidation, and other political retaliation by or on behalf of Turkey’s government; and condition security cooperation and assistance on measurable reforms, as appropriate.
to press the Government of Turkey to repeal or amend— (A) all anti-terrorism laws and regulations that allow the government to unjustly target journalists, political opponents, dissidents, and minorities; (B) all laws and regulations that violate the right to freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, or association in a manner not permitted by international legal standards, including laws and regulations that seek to punish those who insult political figures or denigrate the Turkish nation or state institutions; and (C) all laws and regulations that violate the right to a fair trial
(6) to oppose the export to Turkey by any country of surveillance technologies, including software, that could be used to monitor the activities of journalists, political opponents, dissidents, or minority communities; (7) to condemn the Government of Turkey’s use of transnational repression, including the abuse of INTERPOL notices, renditions, and other extraterritorial measures to target critics abroad; (8) to protect United States persons and lawful permanent residents from harassment, intimidation, and other forms of foreign political retaliation by or on behalf of the Government of Turkey; and (9) to condition United States security cooperation and assistance, as appropriate, on measurable improvements in respect for human rights, rule of law, and compliance with binding international human rights judgments.
The press-freedom section expresses Congress’s view that Turkey should end restrictive enforcement and release journalists imprisoned for their work. It recommends State Department assistance and warnings to endangered journalists regardless of citizenship, including journalists working for Kurdish media organizations, and prioritizing release demands in U.S. communications with Turkish officials.
It is the sense of Congress that— (1) the Government of Turkey must take steps to significantly improve the dire climate for journalists and those supporting the journalism profession, including— (A) ending the enforcement of draconian laws and regulations that restrict freedom of expression; and (B) unconditionally releasing all journalists and media workers who have been imprisoned for fulfilling their professional responsibilities; (2) the Department of State should provide assistance and warnings of impending politically motivated detention or harm to journalists and media workers in danger in Turkey, regardless of citizenship status, including journalists working for Kurdish media organizations; (3) United States Government officials should prioritize demands to release unfairly detained journalists and media workers in their communications with Turkish officials
The internet-freedom section recommends that Turkey change laws allowing websites or content to be blocked on suspicion of insulting political figures. It also urges State Department pressure against blocking journalists’ and media outlets’ social media accounts and content and against arbitrary online-streaming restrictions through licensing. These are expressions of Congress’s view.
It is the sense of Congress that— (1) the Government of Turkey must cease its ongoing crackdown on free expression on the internet, including by repealing or amending laws that allow the government to block a website or remove content from the website if there is sufficient suspicion that the site is insulting political figures; (2) the Department of State should support and pressure the Government of Turkey— (A) to halt its frequent requests that social media companies block accounts and content of journalists and media outlets; and (B) to ensure that the Radio and Television Supreme Council does not arbitrarily restrict online streaming services through a costly and opaque licensing regime
The fair-trial section expresses Congress’s view that Turkey should stop indiscriminate detention and prosecution of legal professionals, protect access to lawyers and confidential lawyer-client communications, allow lawyers to visit people in police custody, and stop prosecuting lawyers because of the clients they represent.
It is the sense of Congress that— (1) the Government of Turkey must— (A) halt its indiscriminate detention and prosecution of lawyers, judges, prosecutors, and court officials, and its targeting of lawyers’ associations; (B) repeal laws restricting the right of lawyers to discharge their professional duties, the rights of suspects to legal counsel, and the right of lawyer-client privileged communication; (C) ensure that lawyers can visit detainees in police custody, and remind police and prosecutors of the protected role of lawyers under Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 5 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers; and (D) end the practice of prosecuting lawyers based on whom they have represented as clients
The same section recommends U.S. pressure to end extended detention before trial, reverse the April 2017 Turkish constitutional change that the bill describes as allowing political control over judicial council nominations, and protect judicial independence. It would not itself amend Turkey’s constitution.
It is the sense of Congress that
the Department of State should pressure the Government of Turkey— (A) to abolish extended pretrial detention, consistent with Turkey’s Judicial Reform Strategy; (B) to reverse the April 2017 amendment to Article 159 of the Constitution of Turkey, which allows for political control over the nomination procedures to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors; and (C) to ensure the independence of judges and of the judiciary system, with particular focus on the Ministry of Justice
If Turkey does not promptly take effective corrective steps, the bill recommends presidential sanctions pursuant to the cited Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act against Turkish officials determined to be responsible for, complicit in, or directly or indirectly involved in specified abuses. These include political imprisonment, politically motivated detention of journalists, restrictions on expression through social media, and other gross human rights violations. This section recommends sanctions rather than requiring them; the referenced law’s full requirements are not supplied.
It is the sense of Congress that if the Government of Turkey does not promptly take effective steps to address the human rights violations described in this Act— (1) the President of the United States should impose sanctions pursuant to the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114–328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) with respect to officials of the Government of Turkey determined to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have directly or indirectly engaged in— (A) the detention of prisoners of conscience and political prisoners; (B) the politically motivated detention of journalists; (C) restricting of freedom of free expression through social media; and (D) other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights
Under that same condition, the bill recommends presidential confirmation that security assistance complies with the cited arms-export and foreign-assistance provisions, whose full requirements are not supplied. It also recommends that the Treasury Secretary direct U.S. executive directors at international financial institutions to oppose loans, grants, policies, or strategies determined to directly enable Turkey’s government to violate its citizens’ human rights.
It is the sense of Congress that if the Government of Turkey does not promptly take effective steps to address the human rights violations described in this Act
(2) the President should confirm that United States security assistance provided to the Government of Turkey is fully consistent with the conditions mandated in section 36 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2776) and the human rights provisions contained in section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2378d); (3) the Secretary of the Treasury should instruct the United States executive director of each international financial institution to oppose any loan, grant, policy, or strategy determined to be directly enabling the Government of Turkey to violate the human rights of its citizens
If Turkey does not promptly take effective corrective steps, the bill also recommends visa restrictions under the announced Khashoggi Ban and a cited immigration provision. The recommendation covers individuals acting on behalf of the government who are believed to have directly engaged in serious operations against perceived dissidents abroad, including operations against dissidents’ relatives or close associates. It also covers family members of those carrying out the operations, as appropriate. The supplied text does not establish the referenced authority’s full requirements or exceptions.
It is the sense of Congress that if the Government of Turkey does not promptly take effective steps to address the human rights violations described in this Act
the Secretary of State should impose visa restrictions under the announced Khashoggi Ban, pursuant to section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(C)) on— (A) individuals who, acting on behalf of the government, are believed to have been directly engaged in serious, extraterritorial counter-dissident activities, including those who— (i) suppress, harass, surveil, threaten, or harm journalists, activists, or other persons perceived to be dissidents for their work; or (ii) engage in such activities with respect to the families or other close associates of such persons; and (B) family members of individuals described in subparagraph (A), as appropriate.
Section 9 would prohibit committing or spending covered funds for Foreign Military Financing, Foreign Military Sales, or other security assistance programs for Turkey’s government unless the Secretary of State certifies the specified human rights conditions to the designated congressional committees, subject to the case-by-case waiver.
No funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for Foreign Military Financing, Foreign Military Sales, or other security assistance programs for the Government of Turkey may be obligated or expended unless the Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that the Government of Turkey
The Secretary of State may waive the application of subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis
Two certification conditions concern imprisonment and peaceful political activity: Turkey must have taken demonstrable, sustained steps to reduce political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, including releases of people detained solely for peaceful exercise of human rights, and must have stopped using counterterrorism and disinformation laws to criminalize peaceful expression, association, and political participation.
(1) has taken demonstrable and sustained steps to reduce the number of prisoners of conscience and political prisoners, including by releasing individuals detained solely for the peaceful exercise of their human rights; (2) has ceased the misuse of counterterrorism and disinformation laws to criminalize peaceful expression, association, and political participation
The other certification conditions require concrete steps toward compliance with binding European Court of Human Rights judgments, including the Kavala and Demirtas cases, and an end to—or an end to systematic participation in—repression of people abroad for exercising fundamental freedoms.
(3) is taking concrete steps to comply with binding judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, including in cases concerning Osman Kavala and Selahattin Demirtas; and (4) has ceased, or is no longer systematically engaging in, acts of transnational repression targeting individuals abroad for exercising their fundamental freedoms.
The Secretary of State could waive the security-assistance restriction case by case for a vital U.S. national security interest. The Secretary would have to report that determination to the designated committees, justify the waiver, and describe efforts to promote the specified reforms.
The Secretary of State may waive the application of subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis if the Secretary determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that such waiver is in the vital national security interest of the United States, and includes a justification for the waiver and a description of efforts to promote the reforms described in subsection (a).
The Secretary of State would have to assist current and former political prisoners and prisoners of conscience in Turkey, along with civil society organizations there working for their release. Required assistance includes documenting abuses, advocacy, efforts to change imprisonment-related laws, and assigning specific U.S. mission staff to observe politically motivated trials, including in Southeast Turkey.
The Secretary of State shall provide assistance to civil society organizations in Turkey that work to secure the release of prisoners of conscience and political prisoners in Turkey, and to current and former prisoners of conscience and political prisoners in Turkey, including— (1) support for the documentation of human rights violations with respect to prisoners of conscience and politically motivated prisoners; (2) support for advocacy in Turkey to raise awareness of issues relating to prisoners of conscience and political prisoners; (3) support for efforts to repeal or amend laws or regulations that are used to imprison individuals as prisoners of conscience or political prisoners; and (4) the delegation of specific United States mission staff who will observe trials in politically motivated cases, including in Southeast Turkey.
The Secretary of State would have to submit an implementation report within 180 days after enactment and annually thereafter for five years. The deadline depends on enactment; the introduced bill supplies no calendar date for it.
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter for 5 years, the Secretary of State shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the implementation of this Act.
Each report would assess prisoners’ numbers, conditions, and legal status; restrictions on expression, association, assembly, and the press; repression targeting people abroad; and any use by Turkey’s government of U.S.-origin goods, services, or technology to facilitate surveillance, censorship, or other serious abuses.
Each report required under subsection (a) shall include— (1) an assessment of the number, conditions, and legal status of prisoners of conscience and political prisoners in Turkey; (2) a description of restrictions on freedom of expression, association, assembly, and the press, including online censorship and blocking of social media platforms and websites; (3) a description of incidents of transnational repression, including renditions, attempted abductions, physical attacks, or misuse of INTERPOL notices targeting individuals in other countries, including the United States; (4) an assessment of any use by the Government of Turkey of United States-origin goods, services, or technologies to facilitate surveillance, censorship, or other serious human rights abuses
Reports would also describe government efforts to suppress political opposition or amend Turkey’s constitution to marginalize opposition and concentrate power. They would describe sanctions, visa restrictions, and other measures taken under the bill and other applicable authorities.
(5) a description of efforts by the Government of Turkey to restrict and repress political opposition parties and leaders, including attempts to eliminate meaningful political disagreement and debate; (6) a description of efforts by the Government of Turkey to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Turkey to marginalize political opposition and consolidate power around one political party or politician; and (7) a description of the sanctions, visa restrictions, and other measures taken pursuant to this Act and other applicable authorities.
The Secretary of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development administrator, as appropriate, would have to expand support for independent journalists and media outlets in Turkey, including those operating in exile; civil society documenting abuses or helping victims of politically motivated persecution; digital rights advocates and organizations working on secure communications, privacy, and cybersecurity for at-risk communities; and education and public awareness about human rights, legal rights, and fundamental freedoms in Turkey.
The Secretary of State and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, as appropriate, shall expand support for— (1) independent journalists and media outlets in Turkey, including those operating in exile; (2) civil society organizations documenting human rights violations or providing assistance to victims of politically motivated persecution; (3) digital rights advocates and organizations working to enhance secure communications, privacy, and cybersecurity for at-risk communities; and (4) initiatives promoting human rights education, legal literacy, and public awareness regarding fundamental freedoms in Turkey.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated August 12, 2026, records House introduction on July 30, 2026, and referral that day to Foreign Affairs and additionally to Financial Services and Judiciary for provisions within their jurisdictions. This dated snapshot does not establish subsequent action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-08-12T21:13:19Z.
2026-07-30: Introduced in House
2026-07-30: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and 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.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-07-30. 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 provision meeting the rider definition was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the absence of riders in other versions or accompanying materials, or establish an amendment’s attachment history.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No earmark was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. General program support and geographic scope alone do not establish congressionally directed spending outside competitive or formula allocation. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not establish absence in other versions or resolve formal earmark status in missing requests, disclosures, committee reports, or conference materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains a conditional exception to its central restriction that warrants scrutiny as a targeted benefit. Classification does not imply impropriety or establish that the exception would be exercised.
Section 9(b) could benefit Turkey’s government by allowing covered security assistance without the human rights certification otherwise required by section 9(a). This case-by-case exception directly qualifies the bill’s central policy of conditioning security assistance on human rights reforms. The Secretary of State must determine and report to the designated congressional committees that the waiver serves a vital U.S. national security interest, provide a justification, and describe efforts to promote the specified reforms. The waiver is discretionary and does not itself guarantee assistance.
No funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for Foreign Military Financing, Foreign Military Sales, or other security assistance programs for the Government of Turkey may be obligated or expended unless the Secretary of State certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that the Government of Turkey— (1) has taken demonstrable and sustained steps to reduce the number of prisoners of conscience and political prisoners, including by releasing individuals detained solely for the peaceful exercise of their human rights; (2) has ceased the misuse of counterterrorism and disinformation laws to criminalize peaceful expression, association, and political participation; (3) is taking concrete steps to comply with binding judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, including in cases concerning Osman Kavala and Selahattin Demirtas; and (4) has ceased, or is no longer systematically engaging in, acts of transnational repression targeting individuals abroad for exercising their fundamental freedoms.
The Secretary of State may waive the application of subsection (a) on a case-by-case basis if the Secretary determines and reports to the appropriate congressional committees that such waiver is in the vital national security interest of the United States, and includes a justification for the waiver and a description of efforts to promote the reforms described in subsection (a).
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Aug 12, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI