PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 23, 2011
Repeal Existing Policies that Encourage and Allow Legal HIV Discrimination Act, the REPEAL HIV Discrimination Act, or the REPEAL Act - Expresses the sense of Congress that federal and state laws, policies, and regulations regarding people living with HIV/AIDS should: (1) not place unique or additional burdens on such individuals solely as a result of their HIV status; and (2) demonstrate a public health-oriented, evidence-based, medically accurate, and contemporary understanding of HIV transmission, health implications, treatment, and the impact of punitive HIV-specific laws and policies on affected people, families, and communities.
Directs: (1) the Attorney General (AG), Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), and Secretary of Defense (DOD) to initiate a national review of federal (including military) and state laws, policies, regulations, and judicial precedents and decisions regarding criminal and related civil commitment cases involving people living with HIV/AIDS; and (2) the AG to transmit to Congress and make publicly available the results of such review with related recommendations.
Requires the AG and HHS Secretary to: (1) develop and publicly release guidance and best practice recommendations for states, and (2) establish an integrated monitoring and evaluation system to measure state progress.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the AG and HHS and DOD Secretaries to transmit to the President and Congress any proposals necessary to implement adjustments to federal laws, policies, or regulations.
Authorizes grants to eligible state and local entities, nongovernmental organizations, and public health departments to incorporate best practice recommendations within state laws, policies, regulations, and judicial decisions. Requires that such entities, departments, or organizations agree to abide with the sense of Congress statements set forth above as a condition of receiving such assistance.
People & committees
Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-9] · 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 Military Personnel.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 14, 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.3053 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.3053 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.3053 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.3053 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.