PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 8, 2003
Pledge Protection Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal judicial code to deny jurisdiction to any court established by Act of Congress to hear or determine any claim that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance violates the first amendment of the Constitution.
People & committees
Rep. Akin, W. Todd [R-MO-2] · R–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 247 - 173 (Roll no. 467).
House roll call 467 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 247 - 173 (Roll no. 467).
House roll call 467 · Individual votesThe 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. 2028.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question on adoption of the Watt amendment which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 781, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson-Lee amendment.
POSTPONED VOTE - At the conclusion of debate on the Watt amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Watt demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 781, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the Watt amendment.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 781, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Sensenbrenner amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 2028.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Mike Pence to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 781 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2028 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 781. (consideration: CR H7451-7478; text of measure as reported in House: CR H7470)
Rule H. Res. 781 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 781 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2028 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 424.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-691.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-691.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 10.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on the Constitution Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
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: Apr 7, 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.2028 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.2028 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.2028 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.2028 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.