PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 4, 2017
Jerusalem Embassy and Recognition Act of 2017
This bill states that it is U.S. policy: (1) to recognize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel, and (2) that the U.S. Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem not later than January 1, 2019.
The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 is amended to eliminate the President's authority to waive certain funding limitations for Department of State acquisition and maintenance of buildings abroad until the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem has officially opened.
Any official U.S. document that lists countries and their capital cities must identify Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
The bill limits appropriations that may be obligated in FY2017 for State Department acquisition and maintenance of buildings abroad until the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem has officially opened.
Of the funds authorized to be appropriated for FY2017 and FY2018 for State Department acquisition and maintenance of buildings abroad, necessary sums should be made available until expended only for construction and other costs associated with the establishment in Jerusalem of the U.S. Embassy in Israel.
People & committees
Rep. Lance, Leonard [R-NJ-7] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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 11, 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.265 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.265 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.265 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.265 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.