PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 28, 2021
Requirements, Expectations, and Standard Procedures for Effective Consultation with Tribes Act or the RESPECT Act
This bill establishes tribal consultation procedures for federal agencies.
Specifically, the bill requires federal agencies to consult with tribal governments (1) before undertaking any proposed federal activity or finalizing any federal regulatory action that may have a tribal impact, and (2) for all activities that would affect any part of federal land sharing a border with Indian land. Tribal impact refers to any federal action that may have an impact on tribal governments, including tribal cultural practices and tribal treaty-protected rights.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Agencies must prepare tribal impact statements to identify potential tribal impacts of a proposed activity or action. Agencies must also make a good faith effort to identify areas that contain sacred sites important to tribal governments.
The bill further outlines consultation requirements, including outreach and meeting arrangements. In general, the consultation shall conclude only upon the execution of a memorandum of agreement between the agency and the tribal government or the members of a designated tribal leader task force.
Next, the bill requires agencies to take certain actions during the decision stage for a proposed activity (e.g., public comment) and for a regulatory action.
Agencies must recognize and respect tribal self-government and sovereignty and grant tribal governments maximum discretion in the administration of federal statutes and regulations.
Tribal governments may seek judicial review of a determination of an agency under this bill if the tribal government has exhausted all other administrative remedies.
People & committees
Rep. Grijalva, Raúl M. [D-AZ-3] · D–AZ
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 Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, 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 Committee on Natural Resources, 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
Hearings Held by the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States Prior to Introduction and Referral.
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: Apr 7, 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.3587 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.3587 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.3587 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.3587 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.