PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1229)
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Jan 21, 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.1936 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.1936 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.1936 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.1936 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 · 2025-03-06 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 Invading Allies Act would block military funding for invading or seizing territory from Canada, Panama, or Greenland unless Congress declares war, provides specific statutory authorization, or a national emergency is created by an attack or imminent threat of attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its Armed Forces. It would also limit military funding for entering actual or clearly impending hostilities on that emergency basis to 60 days beginning when forces are introduced. Activities approved and reported under a specified provision of existing national security law would be excluded.
This Act may be cited as the “No Invading Allies Act”.
No funds available for the United States Armed Forces may be obligated or expended for the Armed Forces to engage in operations to invade or seize territory from Canada, the Republic of Panama, or the self-governing territory of Greenland, in the absence of— (1) a declaration of war by Congress; (2) specific statutory authorization by Congress; or (3) a national emergency created by attack or imminent threat of attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its Armed Forces.
Funds available for the United States Armed Forces may be obligated or expended for introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, by reason of a national emergency created by an attack or imminent threat of attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or the Armed Forces only during the 60-day period beginning on such date of introduction of United States Armed Forces.
Nothing in this Act may be construed— (1) to alter the constitutional authority of Congress or of the President, or the provisions of existing treaties; or (2) to apply to those activities approved and reported pursuant to section 503 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3093).
The bill declares that its restriction is intended to reaffirm international rules, democratic values, alliances and partnerships, and opposition to territorial aggression. These are stated policy goals, not demonstrated effects.
The restriction described in subsection (a) serves to reaffirm that the United States— (1) remains committed to a rules-based international order and democratic values; (2) honors our Nation’s alliances and partnerships; and (3) stands against territorial aggression.
Section 3(a) would prohibit both committing military funds to pay for an operation and actually spending them to invade or seize territory from the three named places. Its exceptions require a congressional declaration of war, specific statutory authorization by Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack or imminent threat of attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its Armed Forces.
No funds available for the United States Armed Forces may be obligated or expended for the Armed Forces to engage in operations to invade or seize territory from Canada, the Republic of Panama, or the self-governing territory of Greenland, in the absence of— (1) a declaration of war by Congress; (2) specific statutory authorization by Congress; or (3) a national emergency created by attack or imminent threat of attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its Armed Forces.
Section 3(b) would allow funds to be committed or spent for introducing U.S. forces into fighting, or circumstances clearly indicating imminent fighting, on the specified national-emergency basis only for 60 days starting when the forces are introduced. This subsection does not expressly repeat the three-place geographic limitation in section 3(a).
(b) Additional limitation relation to national emergency Funds available for the United States Armed Forces may be obligated or expended for introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, by reason of a national emergency created by an attack or imminent threat of attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or the Armed Forces only during the 60-day period beginning on such date of introduction of United States Armed Forces.
The bill would direct that its provisions not be interpreted to change Congress’s or the President’s constitutional authority, or existing treaty provisions.
Nothing in this Act may be construed— (1) to alter the constitutional authority of Congress or of the President, or the provisions of existing treaties;
The bill would exclude activities approved and reported under section 503 of the National Security Act of 1947. The supplied text does not reproduce that section’s requirements.
Nothing in this Act may be construed— (1) to alter the constitutional authority of Congress or of the President, or the provisions of existing treaties; or (2) to apply to those activities approved and reported pursuant to section 503 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3093).
“Introduction of United States Armed Forces” would include assigning U.S. military members to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany another country’s regular or irregular military forces when those forces are fighting or face an imminent threat of fighting. The definition therefore includes specified supporting assignments alongside foreign forces.
In this Act, the term “introduction of United States Armed Forces” includes the assignment of members of such Armed Forces to command, coordinate, participate in the movement of, or accompany the regular or irregular military forces of any foreign country or government when such military forces are engaged, or there exists an imminent threat that such forces will become engaged, in hostilities.
The supplied action snapshot, updated January 21, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the Foreign Affairs and Armed Services committees on March 6, 2025. It also records sponsor introductory remarks on March 25, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2026-01-21T09:05:41Z. 2025-03-25: Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H1229) 2025-03-06: Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2025-03-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-06. 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. The supplied sources cannot establish formal earmark status in absent disclosure or committee materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The finding identifies a targeted exception to the main policy. This classification is not a judgment about its justification.
Activities approved and reported under section 503 of the National Security Act of 1947 would be exempt from the bill, including its military funding restrictions. The favored category is those qualifying activities; the supplied text does not identify particular recipients or reproduce the statutory criteria defining that category.
Nothing in this Act may be construed— (1) to alter the constitutional authority of Congress or of the President, or the provisions of existing treaties; or (2) to apply to those activities approved and reported pursuant to section 503 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3093).
No funds available for the United States Armed Forces may be obligated or expended for the Armed Forces to engage in operations to invade or seize territory from Canada, the Republic of Panama, or the self-governing territory of Greenland, in the absence of—
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jan 21, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI