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. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-9] · R–AZ
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.1609 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.1609 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.1609 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.1609 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 · 2025-02-26 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 Local Zoning Decisions Protection Act of 2025 would nullify specified federal fair-housing rules and a notice, including substantially similar successors. It would prohibit federal funding for federal databases containing geospatial information on community racial disparities or disparities in access to affordable housing. It would also require the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to consult state, local, and public housing agency officials on fair-housing recommendations and publish reports, with public review of the draft.
This Act may be cited as the Local Zoning Decisions Protection Act of 2025.
The interim final rule of the Department of Housing and Urban Development entitled Restoring Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Definitions and Certifications, published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 30779; Docket No. FR–6249–I–01), and any successor rule that is substantially similar to such interim final rule shall have no force or effect.
The final rule of the Department of Housing and Urban Development entitled Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, published in the Federal Register on July 16, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 42272; Docket No. FR–5173–F–04), and any successor rule that is substantially similar to such final rule shall have no force or effect.
The notice of the Department of Housing and Urban Development relating to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Tool, published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 81840; Docket No. FR–5173–N–07), and any successor notice or rule substantially similar to such notice shall have no force or effect.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal funds may be used to design, build, maintain, utilize, or provide access to a Federal database of geospatial information on community racial disparities or disparities in access to affordable housing.
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall jointly consult with State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies to develop recommendations, consistent with applicable rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States, to further the purposes and policies of the Fair Housing Act.
Not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a draft report describing the recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (a).
The Secretary shall make the draft report available for public review and comment for a period of not fewer than 180 days.
Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make publicly available online the final report prepared pursuant to subsection (c)(5).
The bill would give no force or effect to three specified HUD actions: the June 10, 2021 interim final rule on fair-housing definitions and certifications; the July 16, 2015 fair-housing final rule; and the December 31, 2015 notice about a fair-housing assessment tool. It would also nullify successor rules substantially similar to either specified rule, and successor notices or rules substantially similar to the specified assessment-tool notice.
The interim final rule of the Department of Housing and Urban Development entitled Restoring Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Definitions and Certifications, published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 30779; Docket No. FR–6249–I–01), and any successor rule that is substantially similar to such interim final rule shall have no force or effect.
The final rule of the Department of Housing and Urban Development entitled Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, published in the Federal Register on July 16, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 42272; Docket No. FR–5173–F–04), and any successor rule that is substantially similar to such final rule shall have no force or effect.
The notice of the Department of Housing and Urban Development relating to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Tool, published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2015 (80 Fed. Reg. 81840; Docket No. FR–5173–N–07), and any successor notice or rule substantially similar to such notice shall have no force or effect.
The bill would prohibit any federal funds from being used to design, build, maintain, use, or provide access to a federal database containing location-based information about community racial disparities or disparities in access to affordable housing. This prohibition would apply despite other laws.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal funds may be used to design, build, maintain, utilize, or provide access to a Federal database of geospatial information on community racial disparities or disparities in access to affordable housing.
The HUD secretary would have to consult jointly with state, local government, and public housing agency officials to develop recommendations supporting the Fair Housing Act's purposes and policies. Those recommendations would have to be consistent with applicable U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall jointly consult with State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies to develop recommendations, consistent with applicable rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States, to further the purposes and policies of the Fair Housing Act.
HUD would have to give these officials notice and an opportunity to participate, seek a broad range of regional, economic, and geographic perspectives, emphasize collaboration, allow meaningful and timely input, and promote transparency. The consultation would also have to explore whether federal fair-housing objectives could be achieved without new regulations.
the Secretary shall— (1) provide State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies with notice and an opportunity to participate in the consultation process required under subsection (a); (2) seek to consult with State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies that represent a broad cross-section of regional, economic, and geographic perspectives in the United States; (3) emphasize the importance of collaboration with and among the State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies; (4) allow for meaningful and timely input by State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies; (5) promote transparency in the consultation process required under subsection (a); and (6) explore with State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies whether Federal objectives under the Fair Housing Act can be attained by means other than through new regulations.
For this consultation, state and local officials would include elected officials, professional government officials, and officials of regional or national organizations representing those governments or officials. The bill uses an existing statutory definition of public housing agency, which is not reproduced in the supplied text.
The term local government official means an elected or professional official of a local government or an official of a regional or national organization representing local governments or officials.
The term State official means an elected or professional official of a State government or an official of a regional or national organization representing State governments or officials.
The term public housing agency has the meaning given such term in section 3(b) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437a(b)).
Within 12 months after enactment, HUD would have to publish a draft recommendations report in the Federal Register. A recommendation could appear in that draft only if the secretary and the consulted officials had reached consensus on it.
Not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a draft report describing the recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (a).
The Secretary may include a recommendation in the draft report only if consensus has been reached with regard to the recommendation among the Secretary, the State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies consulted pursuant to subsection (a).
If the secretary and consulted officials failed to reach consensus on a regulatory proposal, the draft report would have to say so. It would also have to identify areas of agreement, continuing disagreements, and the reasons for those disagreements.
If the Secretary, State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies consulted under subsection (a) fail to reach consensus on a regulatory proposal, the draft report shall identify that consensus was not reached and shall describe— (A) the areas and issues with regard to which consensus was reached; (B) the areas and issues of continuing disagreement that resulted in the failure to reach consensus; and (C) the reasons for the continuing disagreements.
HUD would have to allow at least 180 days for public review and comments on the draft report. In consultation with the participating officials, the secretary would then have to address comments and prepare a final report describing the consultation's results.
The Secretary shall make the draft report available for public review and comment for a period of not fewer than 180 days.
The Secretary shall, in consultation with the State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies, address any comments received pursuant to paragraph (4) and shall prepare a final report describing the final results of the consultation process under subsection (a).
The final report would have to be publicly available online within 12 months after enactment—the same outside deadline specified for publishing the draft report. Because the draft must receive at least 180 days of public review before comments are addressed in the final report, publishing the draft near its deadline would leave insufficient time to meet the final-report deadline. The text provides no adjustment to reconcile that timing.
Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall make publicly available online the final report prepared pursuant to subsection (c)(5).
Not later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a draft report describing the recommendations developed pursuant to subsection (a).
The Secretary shall make the draft report available for public review and comment for a period of not fewer than 180 days.
The Secretary shall, in consultation with the State officials, local government officials, and officials of public housing agencies, address any comments received pursuant to paragraph (4) and shall prepare a final report describing the final results of the consultation process under subsection (a).
The supplied actions snapshot, updated December 5, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on the Judiciary on February 26, 2025. This snapshot does not establish the bill's subsequent status or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2025-12-05T21:55:27Z. 2025-02-26: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-02-26: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-26. 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 after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials, or document amendment attachment history.
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 after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials; formal earmark status cannot be resolved from absent disclosure and legislative materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential treatment warranting a finding was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Dec 5, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI