PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 15, 1999
Kenneth Starr Corrections Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal Rules of Evidence to provide that: (1) a witness may not be compelled to testify against, or disclose the content of a confidential communication with, a child or parent of that witness; and (2) a member of the United States Secret Service may not be compelled to testify with respect to any conversation of the President heard by such member while such member is on duty.(Sec. 3) Prohibits the bringing of a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement against a witness based on a statement made to the grand jury if: (1) such statement is made in response to a question that is asked by the prosecutor or a member of the grand jury and that arises from or has any basis in physical non-testimonial evidence available and then known to the prosecutor; and (2) the prosecutor fails to provide such evidence to the witness before the conclusion of that witness's testimony or to allow the witness, after receiving such evidence, to explain or modify any testimony.Prohibits: (1) a criminal proceeding from being commenced by an officer or employee of the United States against an individual for making a false statement that relates to adultery or to sexual activity that is not unlawful under Federal law in an affidavit filed in a non-criminal proceeding; and (2) an officer or employee of a U.S. agency from authorizing any person to make an audio or video record of a private communication that such officer, employee, or person reasonably expects will relate to adultery or to sexual activity that is not unlawful under Federal law.(Sec. 4) Amends rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to prohibit the making of a photographic record of a witness who testifies before a grand jury for the purpose of recording the testimony such witness gives before the grand jury.(Sec. 5) Amends the Federal criminal code to prohibit compelling an individual who is a target of an investigation of a violation of Federal law to appear before a grand jury except under the terms of an order that is effective as provided in the code.
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.
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 20, 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.2876 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.2876 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.2876 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.2876 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.