PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 28, 2013
Revises provisions concerning pre-trial investigations of charges and specifications under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to limit such investigation to a determination of whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused committed the specified offense, consideration of the form of charges, and the recommended disposition. Prohibits the purpose of the investigation to be to serve as a discovery tool for the accused. Requires an experienced judge advocate to conduct the investigation, or, in the alternative, to serve as legal advisor to an investigating officer who is not a judge advocate.
Requires the accused, prior to the investigation, to be provided: (1) any sworn or signed statement relating to the offense that is in the government's possession; (2) an opportunity to inspect any books, papers, documents, photographs, objects, buildings, places, or scientific tests or experiments that are in the possession, custody, or control of military authorities and are intended to be used as evidence against the accused; and (3) any evidence known to the government counsel that reasonably tends to negate or reduce the guilt of the accused.
Requires a complaining witness involved in such investigation to be given the opportunity, but not be required, to testify.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Eliminates the accused's right to a reinvestigation of charges upon demand.
People & committees
Rep. Turner, Michael R. [R-OH-10] · R–OH
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 House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 6, 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.3360 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.3360 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.3360 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.3360 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.