PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Apr 19, 2022
Save the Liberty Theatre Act of 2021
This bill provides for a land conveyance to the city of Eunice, Louisiana.
The Department of the Interior shall convey to the city, by quitclaim deed and without consideration, specified parcels of the original townsite of Eunice.
Upon the conveyance of such land to the city, the boundary of the Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, shall be adjusted to exclude the conveyed land and other specified parcels of the original townsite.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Mike [R-LA-4] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 117-112.
Became Public Law No: 117-112.
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 S1886-1887)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S1886-1887)
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 309.
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): 422 - 4 (Roll no. 75). (text: 3/15/2022 CR H3728)
House roll call 75 · 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): 422 - 4 (Roll no. 75).(text: 3/15/2022 CR H3728)
House roll call 75 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3760-3761)
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. 3197.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3728-3729)
Mr. Grijalva moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 195.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 117-266.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 117-266.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.3197 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.3197 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.3197 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.3197 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.