PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 30.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Feb 28, 2019
Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019
This bill revises background check requirements applicable to proposed firearm transfers from a federal firearms licensee (e.g., a licensed gun dealer) to an unlicensed person.
(Sec. 2) First, it increases the amount of time, from 3 business days to a minimum of 10 business days, that a federal firearms licensee must wait to receive a completed background check prior to transferring a firearm to an unlicensed person. (This type of transaction is often referred to as a default proceed transaction.)
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
If a submitted background check remains incomplete after 10 business days, then the prospective purchaser may submit a petition for a final firearms eligibility determination. If an additional 10 days elapse without a final determination, then the federal firearms licensee may transfer the firearm to the prospective purchaser.
(Sec. 3) It requires the Government Accountability Office to report on the extent to which the changes have prevented firearms transfers to prohibited persons.
(Sec. 4) The Federal Bureau of Investigation must report on the number of petitions it receives for final federal firearms determinations.
(Sec. 5) Additionally, the bill modifies statutory references with respect to a particular category of prohibited persons (i.e., persons barred from receiving or possessing a firearm). Specifically, it replaces references to persons adjudicated as a mental defective with persons adjudicated with mental illness, severe developmental disability, or severe emotional instability.
(Sec. 6) The Department of Justice, in consultation with the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence and Firearms, must report on further amendments to the background check process that would likely reduce the risk of death or great bodily harm to victims of domestic violence, domestic abuse, dating partner violence, sexual assault, and stalking.
People & committees
Rep. Clyburn, James E. [D-SC-6] · D–SC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 30.
Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 228 - 198 (Roll no. 103). (text: CR H2284)
House roll call 103 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 228 - 198 (Roll no. 103).(text: CR H2284)
House roll call 103 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 194 - 232 (Roll no. 102).
House roll call 102 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Lesko motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to insert new text on cases in which the transferee is a victim of a crime of domestic violence.
Mrs. Lesko moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text: CR H2291)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 1112.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Van Drew amendment No. 5, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Collins (GA) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the legislative day.
DEABTE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 145, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Van Drew amendment No. 5.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 145, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Porter amendment No. 4.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 145, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Levin (MI) amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Schneider amendment No. 2, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Nadler demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 145, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Schneider amendment No. 2.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 145, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rice (SC) amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 1112.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Lauren Underwood to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 145 and Rule XVIII.
Provides for one hour of debate on each measure. Only those amendments printed in the report shall be in order and the previous question shall be considered ordered without intervening motions except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 145. (consideration: CR H2277-2293)
Rule H. Res. 145 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 145 Reported to House. Provides for one hour of debate on each measure. Only those amendments printed in the report shall be in order and the previous question shall be considered ordered without intervening motions except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 4.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 116-12.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 116-12.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 21 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: May 28, 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.1112 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.1112 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.1112 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.1112 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.