PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 107-37.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 13, 2001
Requires the Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance to authorize payment (within 30 days of employing agency certification) of death or permanent disability benefits to qualified beneficiaries of public safety officers who were killed or who suffered a catastrophic injury as a direct and proximate result of a personal injury sustained in the line of duty in connection with the rescue or recovery efforts related to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
People & committees
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-8] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 107-37.
Became Public Law No: 107-37.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9409-9410)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9409-9410)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 413 - 0 (Roll no. 339). (text: CR H5598)
House roll call 339 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 413 - 0 (Roll no. 339).(text: CR H5598)
House roll call 339 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2882.
Considered by unanimous consent.
Committee on Judiciary discharged. (consideration: CR H5598-5605)
Committee on Judiciary discharged.(consideration: CR H5598-5605)
Mr. Sensenbrenner asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
ORDER OF BUSINESS - Mr. Sensenbrenner asked unanimous consent that it be in order at any time without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House H.R. 2882; that the bill be considered as read for amendment; that the previous question be considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to recommit; and, that the Chair may, notwithstanding the order of the previous question, postpone further consideration of the bill to a time designated by the Speaker. Agreed to without objection.
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.
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.2882 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.2882 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.2882 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.2882 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.