PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 27, 2003
Detention of Enemy Combatants Act - Authorizes the detention of a U.S. person or resident as an enemy combatant if that individual is an al Qaeda member or knowingly cooperated with an al Qaeda member in planning, authorizing, committing, aiding, or abetting a terrorist act against the United States. Directs the Secretary of Defense to prescribe, publish, and report the standards, process, and criteria: (1) to be used in determining that an American citizen or lawful resident is an enemy combatant; and (2) for that individual's detention.Requires rules for the detention of enemy combatants to: (1) establish clear standards and procedures that meet specified requirements, including preserving the Government's ability to detain those who may threaten the United States; and (2) guarantee timely access to judicial review and permit the detainee access to counsel.Authorizes a U.S. person to be detained as an enemy combatant only while there is in effect a presidential certification that: (1) the U.S. armed forces are in a state of armed conflict with al Qaeda and an investigation, prosecution, or post-trial proceeding regarding such person is ongoing; or (2) detention is warranted to prevent such individual from aiding persons attempting to commit terrorist acts against the United States.Grants the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia exclusive jurisdiction to review any detention under this Act.Requires that detainees be: (1) detained at an appropriate location; (2) treated humanely; (3) afforded adequate food, water, shelter, clothing, and medical treatment; (4) sheltered under hygienic conditions; and (5) allowed the free exercise of religion consistent with specified requirements.
People & committees
Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-29] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, 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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E324)
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: Aug 18, 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.R.1029 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.1029 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.1029 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.1029 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.