PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 28, 2005
Confers standing on Members of Congress to bring an action: (1) on the ground that action or inaction by an officer or employee of the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of the Treasury is inconsistent with the intent of Congress as expressed in the text or legislative history of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, and the USA PATRIOT Act; and (2) to enforce compliance with such intent in order to protect the people of the United States against the threat of terrorism, intercept and obstruct terrorist acts, and maintain the integrity of U.S. border security systems.
People & committees
Rep. Culberson, John Abney [R-TX-7] · R–TX
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 Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 16, 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.3542 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.3542 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.3542 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.3542 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.