PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-254.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Oct 12, 1999
Federal Law Enforcement Animal Protection Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit, and set penalties for, willfully and maliciously harming a police animal or attempting or conspiring to do so. Includes among such penalties a ten-year maximum term of imprisonment if the offense permanently disables or disfigures, or causes serious bodily injury to or the death of, the animal. (Defines a "police animal" as a dog or horse employed by a Federal agency for the principal purpose of aiding in the detection of criminal activity, enforcement of laws, or apprehension of criminal offenders.)
People & committees
Rep. Weller, Jerry [R-IL-11] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-254.
Became Public Law No: 106-254.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7298)
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S7298)
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9831)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9831)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1791.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9831-9833)
Mr. McCollum moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 215.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-372.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-372.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.1791 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.1791 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.1791 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.1791 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.