PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 2, 1995
Republican Form of Government Guarantee Act - Revises Federal criminal code provisions setting penalties for assaulting, resisting, intimidating, or impeding any of specified U.S. officers and employees (including Federal judges), to: (1) cover persons who commit such acts against State or local government officers or employees or persons assisting such officers or employees in the performance of official duty; and (2) increase penalties for such acts. Sets a minimum term of two years' imprisonment for: (1) transmitting in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing a threat to kidnap or injure any person; and (2) depositing, or causing to be delivered, any communication threatening to kidnap or injure any person. Declares that each person not otherwise disqualified, barred, or disabled by State or Federal law shall have the right to participate in a republican form of State government free from interference from unlawful violence and the reasonably perceived threat of such violence. Creates a private cause of action, as well as a government remedy (enforceable by the chief executive officer of any State) against any individual or organization for a violation of that right. Authorizes the court to award a reasonable attorney's fee to a prevailing plaintiff. Sets a five-year statute of limitations that begins with the date of discovery of the violation. Directs the Attorney General to develop and implement a training program for Federal law enforcement personnel to enable them to deal more effectively with politically motivated violence. Authorizes an agency that determines that an agency employee or agent is being unlawfully and physically prevented from carrying out lawful duties by employees or agents of a State, county, or local government, to file a complaint with the Attorney General. Directs the Attorney General to investigate the complaint and, if the Attorney General finds the complaint is meritorious, to place in escrow any payments that otherwise would be made to that county under the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act of 1976 until such time as such interference has ceased.
People & committees
Rep. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY-9] · D–NY
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 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 21, 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.2580 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.2580 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.2580 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.2580 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.