PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-139.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 21, 1999
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide that an alien who is adopted while under the age of 18 may be considered a child under such Act if adopted with or after a natural sibling who is a child (under the age of 16).
People & committees
Rep. Horn, Stephen [R-CA-38] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-139.
Became Public Law No: 106-139.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S15220)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S15220)
Senate Committee on Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 404 - 0 (Roll No. 507). (text: CR H10136)
House roll call 507 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 404 - 0 (Roll No. 507).(text: CR H10136)
House roll call 507 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H10152-10153)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2886.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10136-10137)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 218.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-383.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-383.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims.
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.2886 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.2886 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.2886 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.2886 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.