PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 22, 2003
Prisoner of War Protection Act of 2003 - Declares it is U.S. policy to: (1) search out and try in U.S. courts any persons who have mistreated (including willfully killing, torturing, or treating inhumanely) U.S. prisoners of war during the First and Second Gulf Wars; and (2) hold liable countries that commit grave breaches of the Third Geneva Convention against U.S. prisoners of war, including willful killing, torture, and inhumane treatment.
Directs the Secretary of the Treasury, at the request of the plaintiff, to pay from the Treasury, but not exceeding the sum of Iraqi blocked funds that were vested by Executive Order 13290 of March 20, 2003, any judgment in Civil Action No. 02-0632 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia brought by U.S. prisoners of war and their families against the Republic of Iraq, the Iraqi Intelligence Service, and Saddam Hussein for the brutal torture of them during the First Gulf War.
Declares that it shall be U.S. policy to support the claims of U.S. prisoners of war and their families against the Republic of Iraq if, following the Second Gulf War, it becomes evident that U.S. prisoners of war have been killed, tortured, or mistreated during that war, or that the unaccounted-or U.S. prisoner of war from the First Gulf War was killed or tortured by Iraq.
People & committees
Rep. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV-2] · R–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, 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 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 18, 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.2224 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.2224 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.2224 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.2224 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.