PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 30, 2009
William Orton Law Library Improvement and Modernization Act - Authorizes appropriations to the Library of Congress for the maintenance and administration of the operations of the Law Library of the Library of Congress, including the cataloguing of the collections of the Law Library.
Directs the Law Library to electronically catalog and archive material in its collections in a nonproprietary and nondiscriminatory format.
Requires the separation of the salaries and expenses of the Law Library from other salaries and expenses of the Library of Congress in the preparation of the annual budget for the Library of Congress.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes the William Orton Law Library Support Program to provide enhanced or special services and programs for the Law Library and otherwise support the mission of the Law Library.
Allows the Librarian of Congress (the Librarian) to carry out the Program through agreements and partnerships with other government and private entities, including the American Association of Law Libraries and the American Bar Association (ABA).
Permits the Library of Congress Trust Fund Board and the Librarian to accept private donations in support of the Program. Makes any accepted donations subject to disbursement by the Librarian only upon the recommendation of the Law Librarian, with an exception.
Establishes in the Treasury a separate account for the Program. Limits the use of account funds only to the Law Librarian to carry out such Program.
Authorizes annual appropriations to the Library of Congress for the deposit into such account of an amount equal to 40% of the amount of donations accepted by the Board in support of such Program, in addition to any other amounts authorized for the Law Library.
Designates the Law Library as the "National Law Library."
People & committees
Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-16] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 383 - 44 (Roll no. 678). (text: CR 7/28/2009 H8936)
House roll call 678 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 383 - 44 (Roll no. 678).(text: CR 7/28/2009 H8936)
House roll call 678 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9138-9139)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Lungren, Daniel E. objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2728.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8936-8937)
Ms. Lofgren, Zoe moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 86.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 111-170.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on House Administration. H. Rept. 111-170.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
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: 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.2728 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.2728 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.2728 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.2728 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.