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. Gottheimer, Josh [D-NJ-5] · D–NJ
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: Sep 17, 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.10363 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.10363 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.10363 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.10363 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 · 2026-09-14 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 No Grounds for Discrimination Act would require covered coffee shops and similar businesses to offer their goods and services equally, without discrimination or segregation based on specified personal characteristics. It would protect people on grounds including religion, race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, disability, and veteran status.
This Act may be cited as the No Grounds for Discrimination Act.
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods and services of any coffee shop, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of religion, race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, or veteran status.
The proposed protection would cover discrimination and segregation based on religion, race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, or veteran status. It would apply to the full and equal enjoyment of both goods and services.
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods and services of any coffee shop, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of religion, race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, or veteran status.
Coverage would include coffee shops, cafés, tea houses, and other informal dining establishments that serve the public and primarily serve coffee, tea, or other light refreshments. An establishment must also meet one of two conditions: its operations affect commerce, or its discrimination or segregation is supported by state government action.
the term coffee shop means any coffee shop, café, tea house, or other informal dining establishment— (1) that serves the public; (2) that primarily serves coffee, tea, or other light refreshments; and (3) (A) the operations or which affect commerce; or (B) the discrimination or segregation of which is supported by State action.
The proposed protection could be enforced using the same enforcement framework as a violation of title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The bill incorporates that framework by reference rather than spelling out its procedures or remedies.
This section may be enforced in the same manner as a violation of title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000a et seq.).
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 17, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on September 14, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-17T10:19:33Z. 2026-09-14: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2026-09-14: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-14. 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 is limited to that version and does not establish absence in 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 is limited to that version and 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. Equal access protections do not by themselves constitute preferential treatment. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 17, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI