PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 112-180.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 5, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Designates the U.S. courthouse under construction at 101 South U.S. Route 1 in Fort Pierce, Florida, as the "Alto Lee Adams, Sr., United States Courthouse."
People & committees
Rep. Rooney, Thomas J. [R-FL-16] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-180.
Became Public Law No: 112-180.
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. (consideration: CR 9/21/2012 S6666)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR 9/21/2012 S6666)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 445.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works by unanimous consent.
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 11/14/2011 H7416-7417)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 11/14/2011 H7416-7417)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7691)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mrs. Napolitano objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1791.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7416-7417)
Mr. Denham moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the House Calendar, Calendar No. 89.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 112-282.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 112-282.
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
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: Sep 8, 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.