PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 6, 2007
Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act - Directs the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to use the fingerprints provided by an individual at the time of military enlistment to satisfy any naturalization fingerprint requirements if: (1) the individual may be naturalized under the Immigration and Nationality Act; (2) the individual was fingerprinted in accordance with Department of Defense (DOD) requirements; (3) the individual submits a naturalization application within 24 months of enlistment; and (4) the Secretary determines that the fingerprints are sufficient to adjudicate the naturalization application.
Directs the Secretary to inform military naturalization applicants of their choice to provide new fingerprints if such submission would result in more timely and effective naturalization adjudication.
Provides for cooperation between the Secretary and the Secretary of Defense to determine an appropriate fingerprint format.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to update Department of Homeland Security (DHS) websites within 30 days of any change in naturalization law or regulation affecting members of the Armed Forces.
Directs the Comptroller General to: (1) report to the congressional defense and judiciary committees on the naturalization application process for members of the Armed Forces; and (2) conduct a study of this Act's implementation by the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense.
People & committees
Rep. Cummings, Elijah E. [D-MD-7] · D–MD
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 the Judiciary.
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 voice vote. (text: CR H12771-12772)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H12771-12772)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2884.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H12771-12773)
Ms. Lofgren, Zoe moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 270.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 110-429.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 110-429.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1490)
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: Aug 10, 2026. 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.2884 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.2884 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.2884 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.2884 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.